Re: Pre-forking backend - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Pre-forking backend
Date
Msg-id 18136.1001796622@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Pre-forking backend  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Pre-forking backend  (Lincoln Yeoh <lyeoh@pop.jaring.my>)
List pgsql-hackers
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
>> On some operating systems, only one child at a time can accept() on the
>> socket.  On these, you have to lock around the call to accept().

> But how do you know the client wants the database you have forked?  They
> could want a different one.

This approach would only work as far as saving the fork() call itself,
not the backend setup time.  Not sure it's worth the trouble.  I doubt
that the fork itself is a huge component of our start time; it's setting
up all the catalog caches and so forth that's expensive.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: Pre-forking backend
Next
From: "Ken Hirsch"
Date:
Subject: Re: Pre-forking backend