Thread: Re: pgsql and sql-relay

If you're not dying to use Apache, I might recommend taking a look at
AOLServer (http://www.aolserver.com)... it's thread-safe,
multi-threaded, db-connection pooling, lightweight web server...
extrememly fast (powers most of the major server at AOL serving 100+
conns/sec), easy to connect to postgresql (http://www.openacs.org), and
TCL API... if you need each virtual host to have its own db pools, you
can use AOLServer's nsvhr and nsunix modules to set up virtual hosts on
unix sockets... if the virtual hosts can share db pools, then you can
use the VAT module (http://zmbh.com/discussion/vat/)... Since it's got
it all built it, you might look into it...

-jag

Ryan Mahoney wrote:

 > Has anyone on this list used sql-relay with pgsql? If you're not familiar
 > with it, you can find out more at:
 > http://www.firstworks.com/sqlrelay.html. My primary interest is to reap
 > the benefits of connection pooling on an Apache/PHP/PostgreSQL
 > configuration. We're setting up a farm of webservers to talk to our
DB, if
 > we use PHP pooling, we may end up with thousands un-needed open
 > connections. Sql-relay looks a bit involved to set up - but just may be
 > worth it.

The best solution for connection pooling in a web based environment is, of course, AOLServer.;^)

http://www.aolserver.com

Ian

>>> Matt Beauregard <matt@designscape.com.au> 07/05/01 05:32PM >>>
On Thu, Jul 05, 2001 at 03:00:59PM -0400, Jan Wieck wrote:
> Ryan Mahoney wrote:
> > Has anyone on this list used sql-relay with pgsql?  If you're not familiar
> > with it, you can find out more at:
> > http://www.firstworks.com/sqlrelay.html.  My primary interest is to reap
> > the benefits of connection pooling on an Apache/PHP/PostgreSQL
> > configuration.  We're setting up a farm of webservers to talk to our DB, if
> > we use PHP pooling, we may end up with thousands un-needed open
> > connections.  Sql-relay looks a bit involved to set up - but just may be
> > worth it.
>
>     Well,  the  descriptions look really interesting so far. I'll
>     take a closer look at it soon.

We looked at it a while ago, and were unhappy with it.  I'm trying to
remember why.  I believe it was something to do with it mangling the
types of objects returned.  In any case, now that I'm interested again
I'll see if it's improved since then ;-)


--
Matt Beauregard
Technical Director, Designscape
Ph: +61 2 9361 4233   Fx: +61 2 9361 4633

Permission is given for unlimited distribution of this work under the
Copyright Act 1968 (2001 amended).  Unless otherwise stated, you agree
that these terms also cover works which you send in response.


---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly