| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Konstantin Knizhnik <k(dot)knizhnik(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Nikolay Samokhvalov <samokhvalov(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Built-in connection pooling |
| Date: | 2018-04-19 20:59:21 |
| Message-ID: | 20180419205921.ydl6z7z7sy6ibvxv@alap3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2018-04-19 15:01:24 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Only after you can say "there's nothing wrong with this that isn't
> directly connected to its not being in-core" does it make sense to try
> to push the logic into core.
I think there's plenty things that don't really make sense solving
outside of postgres:
- additional added hop / context switches due to external pooler
- temporary tables
- prepared statements
- GUCs and other session state
I think there's at least one thing that we should attempt to make
easier for external pooler:
- proxy authorization
I think in an "ideal world" there's two kinds of poolers: Dumb ones
further out from the database (for short lived processes, keeping the
total number of connections sane, etc) and then more intelligent one
closer to the database.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alexander Korotkov | 2018-04-19 21:00:11 | Re: Corrupted btree index on HEAD because of covering indexes |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2018-04-19 20:49:46 | Re: Repeated crashes in GENERATED ... AS IDENTITY tests |