Re: Any better plan for this query?..
От | Simon Riggs |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Any better plan for this query?.. |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1242159881.3843.313.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Any better plan for this query?.. (Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Any better plan for this query?..
Re: Any better plan for this query?.. Re: Any better plan for this query?.. |
Список | pgsql-performance |
On Tue, 2009-05-12 at 15:52 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 12:49 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > 1. There is no (portable) way to pass the connection from the postmaster > > to another pre-existing process. > > [Googles.] It's not obvious to me that SCM_RIGHTS is non-portable, > and Windows has an API call WSADuplicateSocket() specifically for this > purpose. Robert, Greg, Tom's main point is it isn't worth doing. We have connection pooling software that works well, very well. Why do we want to bring it into core? (Think of the bugs we'd hit...) If we did, who would care? -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: