Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1goLiv-0005Kq-DK for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Tue, 29 Jan 2019 05:14:13 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1goLiu-000609-4o for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Tue, 29 Jan 2019 05:14:12 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:3e1:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1goLit-0005xk-Kh for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Tue, 29 Jan 2019 05:14:11 +0000 Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.25]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1goLir-0000ER-DH for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Tue, 29 Jan 2019 05:14:10 +0000 Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA11620B77; Tue, 29 Jan 2019 00:14:08 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 29 Jan 2019 00:14:08 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=paquier.xyz; h= date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:in-reply-to; s=fm3; bh=HElEim71YqSP8yQa4FCxhg8rbki LBsNZNlSjVlHn5TE=; b=KdXPrGkiLAE+h6SyZJKYtyG+nTgGd5wKQHiYgDi9pS7 CSx2qJUIiq2GS0aTYUdYv5nqeBfGocsmWC0pDWKtoKFGnVeIFFEx/wAZ8fVhzXkG MSbPBYYRE/h4oPLdsMAvZaLYaL9EOGFSDVGj4wvO2pY6teF9wqQx4DEz+K/L68v3 PdEaepEVkxMCQMyYro0HprznQUgMLXDRAwX3VQsYUJ2cwudqGqc3W9tGBzJa8byg FeWjM6EYnkRfgvi45e++G1vaPhZptUNl9hw0h0CKK/7j2q7uXbK3zxolfaqoA47v kjn+safepghJeN8NFlggxL9K0IWaSH66YLHMlgEC8NQ== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=HElEim 71YqSP8yQa4FCxhg8rbkiLBsNZNlSjVlHn5TE=; b=b/z/6jLpBvvvDvSz0lgoHl JmXVJF34U5uU+V+rHdbN8ZyMYo1mKP4LjFCTAomXkSbStEpFFI8hINfL7UNELXHx hFJ1SYQizZd4wBon7HW1VJNMFZJ/M5g093OPckXfhCamyLfcXGYnRenU2cJC4mLy ckABpZLJE2PEQOEELxitbeAP5b0svrtmIC5RoINwTf1eFEY9N65qyCAI28vsRJ4x nXDBZbHCBiKdDhCK+Is28FghIeqoS2g1yIjS2QIXNtiQ/HeLSyA0eAv66iOTUznM G55VD229kKvCzARuTHwZ5BfZG5txaEMekBOTaamhyNueaj9ptETxHXGAXkkY2fJA == X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedtledrjedugdekudcutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfhuthenuceurghilhhouhhtmecufedt tdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmnegfrhhlucfvnfffucdljedtmd enucfjughrpeffhffvuffkfhggtggujgesghdtreertddtvdenucfhrhhomhepofhitghh rggvlhcurfgrqhhuihgvrhcuoehmihgthhgrvghlsehprghquhhivghrrdighiiiqeenuc fkphepiedurddvudehrddufeejrdduiedvnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehm ihgthhgrvghlsehprghquhhivghrrdighiiinecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptd X-ME-Proxy: Received: from paquier.xyz (c137162.net61215.cablenet.ne.jp [61.215.137.162]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 2AA6DE4511; Tue, 29 Jan 2019 00:14:05 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2019 14:14:03 +0900 From: Michael Paquier To: Dimitri Fontaine Cc: Bruce Momjian , Konstantin Knizhnik , PostgreSQL Hackers Subject: Re: Built-in connection pooler Message-ID: <20190129051403.GF3121@paquier.xyz> References: <20190128211040.GF26761@momjian.us> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="vA66WO2vHvL/CRSR" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Precedence: bulk --vA66WO2vHvL/CRSR Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 10:33:06PM +0100, Dimitri Fontaine wrote: > In other cases, it's important to measure and accept the possible > performance cost of running a proxy server between the client connection > and the PostgreSQL backend process. I believe the numbers shown in the > previous email by Konstantin are about showing the kind of impact you > can see when using the patch in a use-case where it's not meant to be > helping much, if at all. Have you looked at the possibility of having the proxy worker be spawned as a background worker? I think that we should avoid spawning any new processes on the backend from the ground as we have a lot more infrastructures since 9.3. The patch should actually be bigger, the code is very raw and lacks comments in a lot of areas where the logic is not so obvious, except perhaps to the patch author. -- Michael --vA66WO2vHvL/CRSR Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCgAdFiEEG72nH6vTowiyblFKnvQgOdbyQH0FAlxP4RsACgkQnvQgOdby QH3aeA//Umz6GOqM74yWiwMy1ybeIxumoZRjTwo64mPI1FeSDPGixs8H2bolqDiQ O6iTbG1jAMUaNn2yyLsbtNYLtX1c52ILAgmXx0Viohe3Z/X7vuURK3FKyMkpp7x9 wslQ2E9Lt6CRi9LC9Fn7HNDIh6QHNuum/Das5dOyOFZcMbvEPiQGz5za4C2qfkj3 /1wKhlGvklgPmDe5By8g/qYSYqNeYNZb4lg4ASsCys1EQrOfxZQknr+O/xodZxwf m3G2Q79oD+yEuTX5+i4s/YwWGasBrh+2vfkIsL9tXB24i/N/OfgRJQuswusLVkT6 ihHqvNeHJ0lXgnh7wujSJ19WAI3ADANS9/DC8rL5Ra1jy+vxeyA2eZGiNwoUesRp qMCMSY1aLeF6VRghUnsXRjR3MEyAFtZZ0rk1+crdFkPDN9Dby5VgnPAPoZzH1m2o VXavIDflG5kGnqmK6rDwb5MmKgG8qvf1fePEjO6Lt+4ZdfiSvJ9g8EMxKDu94wqu q47WrEFCayrshNbWhlABo7H1/ZrXexVcEhQayvZyKeDgvVon3pd/ECpG1xIZh0hD 6o757RWp7EGqNpUm5UDRLkZRoY89p0WSFZagBjqPkPhrleRIuERr/uDbcWyCccS2 fXRA4JXB2w9EnYmeYE1TMMJh9MP1uESRbVZz7kgou4M49Ocxfyo= =tE34 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --vA66WO2vHvL/CRSR--