Re: Pre-forking backend

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Ken Hirsch <kenhirsch(at)myself(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Pre-forking backend
Date: 2001-09-29 20:50:22
Message-ID: 18136.1001796622@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
>> On some operating systems, only one child at a time can accept() on the
>> socket. On these, you have to lock around the call to accept().

> But how do you know the client wants the database you have forked? They
> could want a different one.

This approach would only work as far as saving the fork() call itself,
not the backend setup time. Not sure it's worth the trouble. I doubt
that the fork itself is a huge component of our start time; it's setting
up all the catalog caches and so forth that's expensive.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ken Hirsch 2001-09-29 21:06:13 Re: Pre-forking backend
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2001-09-29 20:29:44 Re: Pre-forking backend