Received: from p1.selectacast.net (p1.selectacast.net [206.41.1.251]) by mail.postgresql.org (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eBJ1JJ632207 for ; Mon, 18 Dec 2000 20:19:19 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from jks@selectacast.net) Received: from selectacast.net (IDENT:jks@d1 [209.219.91.66]) by p1.selectacast.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id UAA21226; Mon, 18 Dec 2000 20:18:58 -0500 Message-ID: <3A3EB781.80186971@selectacast.net> Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2000 20:18:57 -0500 From: Joseph Shraibman Organization: Xtenit, Inc. http://www.xtenit.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.15 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Clark, Joel" CC: "'sk@pobox.com'" , pgsql-interfaces@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Connection Pooling...(Repost)...please do help.. References: <69F195289743D411B428009027E293C40267104F@CLTEXCH1> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archive-Number: 200012/162 X-Sequence-Number: 506 "Clark, Joel" wrote: > > I haven't found PG to have much connection overhead, why would open/closing > a connection-per-query require server side connection pooling? Each connection causes the backend to fork. With a heavy load you'll feel the overhead of creating and closing so many connections. -- Joseph Shraibman jks@selectacast.net Increase signal to noise ratio. http://www.targabot.com