Re: Connection Pooling, a year later

From: Don Baccus <dhogaza(at)pacifier(dot)com>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: mlw <markw(at)mohawksoft(dot)com>, owensmk(at)earthlink(dot)net, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Subject: Re: Connection Pooling, a year later
Date: 2001-12-18 16:14:57
Message-ID: 3C1F6B81.10500@pacifier.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Bruce Momjian wrote:

> It would just be nice to have it done internally rather than have all
> the clients do it, iff it can be done cleanly.

Serious client applications that need it already do it. Firing up an
Oracle or most other db's isn't that lightweight a deal, either, it's
not useful only for PG..

Personally I'd just view it as getting in the way, but then I use a
webserver that's provided connection pooling for client threads for the
last seven years ...

I agree with Tom that the client seems to be the best place to do this.

Among other things it isn't that difficult. If you know how to fire up
one connection, you know how to fire up N of them and adding logic to
pool them afterwards is easy enough.
--
Don Baccus
Portland, OR
http://donb.photo.net, http://birdnotes.net, http://openacs.org

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Don Baccus 2001-12-18 16:24:31 Re: Connection Pooling, a year later
Previous Message Lee Kindness 2001-12-18 16:04:13 Re: Bulkloading using COPY - ignore duplicates?