Re: Re: PHP and PostgreSQL - Mailing list pgsql-interfaces

From Tom Samplonius
Subject Re: Re: PHP and PostgreSQL
Date
Msg-id Pine.BSF.4.05.10101022030040.8582-100000@misery.sdf.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Re: PHP and PostgreSQL  (mlw <markw@mohawksoft.com>)
Responses Re: Re: PHP and PostgreSQL  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-interfaces
On Tue, 2 Jan 2001, mlw wrote:

> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > 
> > Does this requested chagne have to do with Apache or PostgreSQL?
> > 
> I suspect it is a request that live postgresql processes can linger
> around after a connection is completed and be re-assigned to a new
> connection as soon as one comes along. This will save the startup cost
> of a new postgresql process. This is what apache does.
 I don't think is really going to provide much of an impact.  Postgres
has to do a lot more initialization per session than Apache.  Mainly
because Postgres has to deal with a stateful protocol, not a stateless one
like Apache.  Besides, as already has been tested, session startup time is
minimal.

> -- 
> http://www.mohawksoft.com

Tom



pgsql-interfaces by date:

Previous
From: Michael Davis
Date:
Subject: RE: ODBC-Problem
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Re: PHP and PostgreSQL