| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Dave Cramer <Dave(at)micro-automation(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Johan Svensson <johan(dot)svensson(at)windh(dot)net>, "pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Problem with JTA/JTS |
| Date: | 2002-06-14 14:46:14 |
| Message-ID: | 6378.1024065974@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-jdbc |
Dave Cramer <Dave(at)micro-automation(dot)net> writes:
> Ok, the problem is that PostgresDataSource does NOT pool connections.
Well, that answers that ...
On reflection though, the behavior Johan reports seems curious. Is it
really possible that new connections could be launched faster than old
ones shut down? The backend startup time is not trivial, and he is
executing a query on each connection too. It's hard to believe that the
backend shutdown time exceeds startup + query time.
Can you think of any reason why the client-side connection closure might
not get signaled to the backend immediately? If, say, there were some
kind of TCP timeout involved, then the report would make a whole lot
more sense.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dave Cramer | 2002-06-14 15:07:02 | Re: Problem with JTA/JTS |
| Previous Message | Dave Cramer | 2002-06-14 14:31:55 | Re: Problem with JTA/JTS |