From: | Peter Mount <peter(at)maidstone(dot)gov(dot)uk> |
---|---|
To: | "'Tom Lane'" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, <pgsql-interfaces(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | RE: [INTERFACES] Re: [HACKERS] Revised proposal for libpq and FE/BE protocol changes |
Date: | 1998-04-29 15:18:22 |
Message-ID: | 714F8949628ED1119E0F0060082C52F50951D5@vesta.maidstone.gov.uk |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-interfaces |
I have had a report from someone using Servlets, that they are opening
something like 5 to 10 connections from a single Java Servlet, which then
brokers them to clients.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pgsql-interfaces(at)hub(dot)org
[mailto:owner-pgsql-interfaces(at)hub(dot)org]On Behalf Of Tom Lane
Sent: Wednesday, April 29, 1998 3:28 PM
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org; pgsql-interfaces(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: [INTERFACES] Re: [HACKERS] Revised proposal for libpq and FE/BE
protocol changes
In the current system architecture, much the easiest way to execute
concurrent queries is to open up more than one connection. There's
nothing that says a frontend process can't fire up multiple backend
processes. I think this is probably sufficient, because I don't
foresee such a thing becoming really popular anyway.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 1998-04-29 16:04:41 | Re: [HACKERS] Revised proposal for libpq and FE/BE protocol changes |
Previous Message | Jose' Soares Da Silva | 1998-04-29 15:04:26 | Re: [INTERFACES] Access'97 and ODBC |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 1998-04-29 16:04:41 | Re: [HACKERS] Revised proposal for libpq and FE/BE protocol changes |
Previous Message | Jose' Soares Da Silva | 1998-04-29 15:04:26 | Re: [INTERFACES] Access'97 and ODBC |