From: | Ragnar Hafstað <gnari(at)simnet(dot)is> |
---|---|
To: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org, Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp> |
Subject: | Re: PgPool changes WAS: PostgreSQL clustering VS MySQL |
Date: | 2005-01-24 18:24:05 |
Message-ID: | 1106591045.22635.7.camel@localhost.localdomain |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Mon, 2005-01-24 at 09:52 -0800, Josh Berkus wrote:
> [about keeping connections open in web context]
> Ah, clarity problem here. I'm talking about connection pooling tools from
> the client (webserver) side, such as Apache::DBI, PHP's pg_pconnect,
> Jakarta's connection pools, etc. Not pooling on the database server side,
> which is what pgPool provides.
note that these sometimes do not provide connection pooling as such,
just persistent connections (Apache::DBI)
> Most of these tools allocate a database connection to an HTTP/middleware
> client, and only release it after a specific period of inactivity. This
> means that you *could* count on "web-user==connection" for purposes of
> switching back and forth to the master -- as long as the connection-recycling
> timeout were set higher than the pgPool switch-off period.
no. you can only count on web-server-process==connection, but not
web-user==connection, unless you can garantee that the same user
client always connects to same web-server process.
am i missing something ?
gnari
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alexander Dolgin | 2005-01-24 18:33:39 | 200 times slower then MSSQL?? |
Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2005-01-24 17:52:40 | Re: PgPool changes WAS: PostgreSQL clustering VS MySQL clustering |