Re: PgPool changes WAS: PostgreSQL clustering VS MySQL
От | Ragnar Hafstað |
---|---|
Тема | Re: PgPool changes WAS: PostgreSQL clustering VS MySQL |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1106591045.22635.7.camel@localhost.localdomain обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: PgPool changes WAS: PostgreSQL clustering VS MySQL clustering (Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: PgPool changes WAS: PostgreSQL clustering VS MySQL
Re: PgPool changes WAS: PostgreSQL clustering VS MySQL |
Список | pgsql-performance |
On Mon, 2005-01-24 at 09:52 -0800, Josh Berkus wrote: > [about keeping connections open in web context] > Ah, clarity problem here. I'm talking about connection pooling tools from > the client (webserver) side, such as Apache::DBI, PHP's pg_pconnect, > Jakarta's connection pools, etc. Not pooling on the database server side, > which is what pgPool provides. note that these sometimes do not provide connection pooling as such, just persistent connections (Apache::DBI) > Most of these tools allocate a database connection to an HTTP/middleware > client, and only release it after a specific period of inactivity. This > means that you *could* count on "web-user==connection" for purposes of > switching back and forth to the master -- as long as the connection-recycling > timeout were set higher than the pgPool switch-off period. no. you can only count on web-server-process==connection, but not web-user==connection, unless you can garantee that the same user client always connects to same web-server process. am i missing something ? gnari
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: