| From: | James Mansion <james(at)mansionfamily(dot)plus(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Andrew Chernow <ac(at)esilo(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: libpq WSACleanup is not needed |
| Date: | 2009-01-18 23:58:30 |
| Message-ID: | 4973C226.7080102@mansionfamily.plus.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Magnus Hagander wrote:
> The use-case of rapidly creating and dropping connections isn't
> particularly common, I think. And there is a perfectly functioning
> workaround - something that we should perhaps document in the FAQ or
> somewhere in the documentation?
>
Would it be accetable to do initialise if the number of connections is
changing from 0, and
tidy if the cumber goes back to 0? Applications that retain a
connection would not
suffer the cost on subsequent connect/disconnect.
The init/term is the tidiest way to do it, but the above might help -
perhaps init could just
add a phantom usecount and work the same way.
If you have a DLL for libpq, could you do it in process attach and
detach? Wouldn't
that be the most common case anyway?
James
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Chernow | 2009-01-19 00:18:08 | Re: libpq WSACleanup is not needed |
| Previous Message | Brendan Jurd | 2009-01-18 21:30:03 | Re: pg_dump versus views and opclasses |