| From: | "Bill Wordsworth" <bill(dot)wordsworth(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL, clusters and load-balance |
| Date: | 2008-03-25 20:04:55 |
| Message-ID: | 1e07a2bd0803251304q23a1b18ar412017dca4f6654d@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 2:24 PM, Thomas Kellerer <spam_eater(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:
> Bill Wordsworth wrote on 25.03.2008 19:16:
> > When traffic goes up, my webserver creates multiple instances of
> > postgresql.exe. At some basic level, aren't they similar to Oracle's RAC
> > "clusters", except that they are not aware of each other?
>
> No, absolutely not. Each client request is handled by a single postgres
> process
> which is spawned by the postmaster upon connection.
Thanks Joshua and Thomas. I guess my ignorance is showing :). Anyway, is
this spawning being done by postmaster or webserver or both? If postmaster,
does an application-level persistent connection request communicate itself
directly to the postmaster, and can the postmaster keep track of its
spawning?
Also, at some crude level, if I were to direct every alternate connection to
a different install box of postgresql, won't that help with *some*
load-balance?
Cheers, Bill
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Keaton Adams | 2008-03-25 20:07:15 | PostgreSQL Replication with read-only |
| Previous Message | Charles Simard | 2008-03-25 19:24:47 | Re: Converting mysql "on update" to postgres "rule" |