On Mon, Dec 05, 2016 at 01:48:03PM -0600, Jim Nasby wrote:
> max_connections is a frequent point of contention between users and
> developers. Users want to set it high so they don't have to deal with Yet
> More Software (pgpool or pgBouncer); PG developers freak out because
> backends are pretty heavyweight, there's some very hot code that's sensitive
> to the size of ProcArray, lock contention, etc.
>
> One solution to this would be to segregate connection handling from actual
> backends, somewhere along the lines of separating the main loop from the
> switch() that handles libpq commands. Benefits:
[interesting stuff elided]
What do you see as the relationship between this proposal and the
earlier one for admission control?
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/4B38C1C5020000250002D9A5@gw.wicourts.gov
Best,
David.
--
David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter
Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david(dot)fetter(at)gmail(dot)com
Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
