Excerpts from Markus Wanner's message of mié nov 17 07:04:04 -0300 2010:
> > Thoughts?
>
> The question obviously is whether or not this is faster than just
> terminating one backend and starting a new one. Which basically costs an
> additional termination and re-creation of a process (i.e. fork())
> AFAICS. Or what other savings do you envision?
I don't think it's a speed thing only. It would be a great thing to
have in autovacuum, for example, where we have constant problem reports
because the system failed to fork a new backend. If we could simply
reuse an already existing one, it would be a lot more robust.
--
Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
