| From: | "Nicholson, Brad (Toronto, ON, CA)" <bnicholson(at)hp(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Marc Cousin <cousinmarc(at)gmail(dot)com>, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Craig Ringer <ringerc(at)ringerc(dot)id(dot)au>, "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Hope for a new PostgreSQL era? |
| Date: | 2011-12-08 16:27:56 |
| Message-ID: | EC55DC235432104F8255702A8D7344D925702A44@G9W0741.americas.hpqcorp.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 9:11 AM, Marc Cousin <cousinmarc(at)gmail(dot)com>
> > wrote:
>
> I wish it was the same (I use and like both pgbouncer and pgpool too,
> and they do a good job, I'm not arguing on that). But unfortunately it
> isn't: you still have the notion of session for each connected client
> in Oracle when using the shared servers model.
>
> It means you keep your session variables, your prepared statements,
> your running transaction, etc… in each individual session while having
> the multiplexing equivalent of a 'statement level' from pgbouncer.
In Oracle - can the pool share connections between DB users and/or databases on the instance? If the answer is yes to either, that is a fair bit better than what we can achieve today.
Brad.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tomas Vondra | 2011-12-08 16:50:06 | Re: Hope for a new PostgreSQL era? |
| Previous Message | Andreas Brandl | 2011-12-08 16:18:42 | Statistics mismatch between n_live_tup and actual row count |