From: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, ivan babrou <ibobrik(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Millisecond-precision connect_timeout for libpq |
Date: | 2013-07-09 20:18:15 |
Message-ID: | CAHyXU0xyj53agUgYUV2WUR9O7wLcnMg+RHZM-x39rcW+Z-vgbA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Jul 5, 2013 at 3:01 PM, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> wrote:
> On 07/05/2013 12:26 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> ivan babrou <ibobrik(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>>> If you can figure out that postgresql is overloaded then you may
>>> decide what to do faster. In our app we have very strict limit for
>>> connect time to mysql, redis and other services, but postgresql has
>>> minimum of 2 seconds. When processing time for request is under 100ms
>>> on average sub-second timeouts matter.
>>
>> If you are issuing a fresh connection for each sub-100ms query, you're
>> doing it wrong anyway ...
>
> It's fairly common with certain kinds of apps, including Rails and PHP.
> This is one of the reasons why we've discussed having a kind of
> stripped-down version of pgbouncer built into Postgres as a connection
> manager. If it weren't valuable to be able to relocate pgbouncer to
> other hosts, I'd still say that was a good idea.
for the record, I think this is a great idea.
merlin
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Markus Wanner | 2013-07-09 20:41:50 | Re: Review: extension template |
Previous Message | Kevin Grittner | 2013-07-09 19:50:47 | Re: refresh materialized view concurrently |