Re: Re: [NOVICE] Re: re : PHP and persistent connections - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Re: [NOVICE] Re: re : PHP and persistent connections
Date
Msg-id 11237.975344940@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Re: [NOVICE] Re: re : PHP and persistent connections  ("Ross J. Reedstrom" <reedstrm@rice.edu>)
Responses Re: Re: [NOVICE] Re: re : PHP and persistent connections  ("Ross J. Reedstrom" <reedstrm@rice.edu>)
List pgsql-hackers
"Ross J. Reedstrom" <reedstrm@rice.edu> writes:
> Which brings us back around to the point of why this is on Hackers:
> PostgreSQL currently has no clean method for dropping idle connections.
> Yes, some apps handle this themselves, but not all. A number of people
> seem to feel there is a need for this feature.

I'm still not following exactly what people think would happen if we did
have such a "feature".  OK, the backend times out after some interval
of seeing no activity, and disconnects.  How is the client going to
react to that, exactly, and why would it not conclude that something's
gone fatally wrong with the database?

Seems to me that you still end up having to fix the client, and that
in the last analysis this is a client issue, not something for the
backend to hack around.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Ross J. Reedstrom"
Date:
Subject: Re: Re: [NOVICE] Re: re : PHP and persistent connections
Next
From: Marko Kreen
Date:
Subject: Re: Re: [GENERAL] Warning: Don't delete those /tmp/.PGSQL.* files