From: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Magnus Hagander <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Function to kill backend |
Date: | 2004-04-06 18:48:28 |
Message-ID: | 200404061148.28751.josh@agliodbs.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce,
> Someone already posted some pseudocode where they wanted to kill idle
> backends, perhaps as part of connection pooling.
I'm not talking about code. I'm talking about a *reason*.
i.e.: "I'm administrator of the blah-blah project. We had a lot of trouble
managing idle connections to PG because of blah-blah. A function to kill
off idle connctions would really help us becuase blah-blah-blah."
So far, all we've heard in favor of SIGTERM-by-PID are *hypothetical* cases.
Now Tom's telling us that there is a real cost attached to having this
feature. Before we do it anyway, I want to be convinced that someone really
needs it. It is *not* our practice to add features "just because we can."
Otherwise, I'll stick by my assertion that idle connection management should
be done in the middleware and NOT by psql.
--
-Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2004-04-06 18:55:32 | Re: Function to kill backend |
Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2004-04-06 18:39:01 | Re: [HACKERS] logging statement levels |