Re: One process per session lack of sharing

Hi

> AMatveev(at)bitec(dot)ru writes:
>> Is there any plan to implement "session per thread" or "shared
>> sessions between thread"?

> No, not really. The amount of overhead that would add --- eg, the need
> for locking on what used to be single-use caches --- makes the benefit
> highly questionable.
A two-layer cache is the best answer.
> Also, most people who need this find that sticking
> a connection pooler in front of the database solves their problem
It has some disadvantages. Lack of temporary table for example
Practical usage of that table with connection poller is highly
questionable.
And so on.
> , so
> there's not that much motivation to do a ton of work inside the database
> to solve it there.
It is clear. Thank you.

--