Hi,
Denis Gasparin wrote:
> Why not to implement a connection pooling server side as apache for
> example does?
This has certainly been discussed before.
IIRC the real argument against that was, that fork() isn't the most
expensive thing to do anymore. And Postgres does lots of other stuff
after accept(), namely connecting to a certain database, authenticating
the user, etc..
If you still want to optimize that, you'd end up having n spare backends
*per database*. I do that in Postgres-R - not for connection pooling,
but for application of remote transactions.
Regards
Markus
