From: Frank Wiles <frank@wiles.org>
To: Dave Dutcher <dave@tridecap.com>
Cc: mjs_ops@gmx.net
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [PERFORMANCE] Stored Procedures
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 11:25:26 -0600
Message-ID: <20060123112526.1ee25dcd.frank@wiles.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <000001c62039$579e88b0$8300a8c0@tridecap.com>
References: <1138022845.949.26.camel@servidor>
<000001c62039$579e88b0$8300a8c0@tridecap.com>
On Mon, 23 Jan 2006 10:23:17 -0600
"Dave Dutcher" <dave@tridecap.com> wrote:
> I don't think pgpool is what you need. If I understand pgpool
> correctly, pgpool lets you pool multiple postgres servers together.
> You are just looking for database connection pooling.
While pgpool can let you pool together multiple backend servers,
it also functions well as just a connection pooling device with
only one backend.
---------------------------------
Frank Wiles <frank@wiles.org>
http://www.wiles.org
---------------------------------
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: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: frank@wiles.org, dave@tridecap.com, mjs_ops@gmx.net
Subject: Re: [PERFORMANCE] Stored Procedures
In-Reply-To: <20060123112526.1ee25dcd.frank@wiles.org>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox