| From: | Tom Samplonius <tom(at)sdf(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | mlw <markw(at)mohawksoft(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, PostgreSQL-interfaces <pgsql-interfaces(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [INTERFACES] Re: PHP and PostgreSQL |
| Date: | 2001-01-03 04:32:03 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.BSF.4.05.10101022030040.8582-100000@misery.sdf.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-interfaces |
On Tue, 2 Jan 2001, mlw wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >
> > Does this requested chagne have to do with Apache or PostgreSQL?
> >
> I suspect it is a request that live postgresql processes can linger
> around after a connection is completed and be re-assigned to a new
> connection as soon as one comes along. This will save the startup cost
> of a new postgresql process. This is what apache does.
I don't think is really going to provide much of an impact. Postgres
has to do a lot more initialization per session than Apache. Mainly
because Postgres has to deal with a stateful protocol, not a stateless one
like Apache. Besides, as already has been tested, session startup time is
minimal.
> --
> http://www.mohawksoft.com
Tom
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2001-01-03 06:07:16 | Re: [INTERFACES] Re: PHP and PostgreSQL |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2001-01-03 02:24:12 | Re: GNU readline and BSD license |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2001-01-03 06:07:16 | Re: [INTERFACES] Re: PHP and PostgreSQL |
| Previous Message | Michael Davis | 2001-01-03 00:54:17 | RE: ODBC-Problem |