From: | David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)BlueTreble(dot)com> |
Cc: | Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Separate connection handling from backends |
Date: | 2016-12-05 20:14:02 |
Message-ID: | 20161205201402.GA3816@fetter.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Dec 05, 2016 at 01:48:03PM -0600, Jim Nasby wrote:
> max_connections is a frequent point of contention between users and
> developers. Users want to set it high so they don't have to deal with Yet
> More Software (pgpool or pgBouncer); PG developers freak out because
> backends are pretty heavyweight, there's some very hot code that's sensitive
> to the size of ProcArray, lock contention, etc.
>
> One solution to this would be to segregate connection handling from actual
> backends, somewhere along the lines of separating the main loop from the
> switch() that handles libpq commands. Benefits:
[interesting stuff elided]
What do you see as the relationship between this proposal and the
earlier one for admission control?
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/4B38C1C5020000250002D9A5@gw.wicourts.gov
Best,
David.
--
David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter
Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david(dot)fetter(at)gmail(dot)com
Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2016-12-05 20:50:02 | Re: Cache Hash Index meta page. |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2016-12-05 20:14:01 | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Introduce dynamic shared memory areas. |