| From: | Darren Johnson <darren(dot)johnson(at)home(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Bradley McLean <brad(at)bradm(dot)net>, Gavin Sherry <swm(at)linuxworld(dot)com(dot)au>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Pre-forking backend |
| Date: | 2001-09-30 23:51:06 |
| Message-ID: | 3BB7AFEA.508@home.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
>
> Once we have schemas (7.3, I hope), I think a lot of installations will
> have only one production database. However, if we were going to do this
> what we'd probably do is allow the DBA to configure the postmaster to
> start N pre-forked backends per database, where N can depend on the
> database. There's no reason to limit it to just one database.
The optimized version of Postgres-R uses pre-forked backends for
handling remote
write sets. It currently uses one user/database, so I'm all for having
a configurable
parameter for starting a pool of backends for each database. We'll have
to make sure
that number * the number of databases is lower than the max number of
backends at
start up.
Darren
>
>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2001-09-30 23:52:48 | Re: CVS changes |
| Previous Message | Vince Vielhaber | 2001-09-30 23:45:15 | Re: [HACKERS] CVS changes |