public inbox for [email protected]  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed

From: Vladimir Churyukin <[email protected]>
To: Heikki Linnakangas <[email protected]>
Cc: pghackers <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Multiple startup messages over the same connection
Date: Sat, 18 May 2024 14:09:37 -0700
Message-ID: <CAFSGpE3pTDt5gi2fzRfjK3g2et1NYA7N-txS3+OWNYTd=Zn67g@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
References: <CAFSGpE2RxR51HXezRwO+vJ4MPHORTTc3djEkJztGkWON4cWP0g@mail.gmail.com>
	<[email protected]>

On Mon, Jan 22, 2024 at 11:43 PM Heikki Linnakangas <[email protected]> wrote:

> On 22/01/2024 21:58, Vladimir Churyukin wrote:
> > A question about protocol design - would it be possible to extend the
> > protocol, so it can handle multiple startup / authentication messages
> > over a single connection? Are there any serious obstacles? (possible
> > issues with re-initialization of backends, I guess?)
> > If that is possible, it could improve one important edge case - where
> > you have to talk to multiple databases on a single host currently, you
> > need to open a separate connection to each of them. In some cases
> > (multitenancy for example), you may have thousands of databases on a
> > host, which leads to inefficient connection utilization on clients (on
> > the db side too). A lot of other RDBMSes  don't have this limitation.
>
> The protocol and the startup message are the least of your problems.
> Yeah, it would be nice if you could switch between databases, but the
> assumption that one backend operates on one database is pretty deeply
> ingrained in the code.
>
> --
> Heikki Linnakangas
> Neon (https://neon.tech)
>
>
Sorry to revive this old thread, just want to check on one thing:
Let's say we keep one database per backend rule, I understand at this point
it would be really hard to change.
What if on a new startup message we just signal the postmaster about it, so
it takes over the socket and spawns a new backend.
After that we terminate the old one. How does it sound like in terms of
implementation complexity?
I guess the process of passing control from child processes to the parent
could be a bit tricky for that one, but doable?
Is there anything I'm missing that can be a no-go for this?
The end goal is to minimize a large overhead for clients having to deal
with a large number of connections on multi-tenant systems (say, one client
deals with thousands of databases on the same database server).

-Vladimir Churyukin

view thread (3+ messages)  latest in thread

reply

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
  reply via email

  To: [email protected]
  Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
  Subject: Re: Multiple startup messages over the same connection
  In-Reply-To: <CAFSGpE3pTDt5gi2fzRfjK3g2et1NYA7N-txS3+OWNYTd=Zn67g@mail.gmail.com>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox