Received: from maia.hub.org (maia-3.hub.org [200.46.204.243]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 475656324AA for ; Sat, 24 Jul 2010 02:32:34 -0300 (ADT) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.243]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 74117-08 for ; Sat, 24 Jul 2010 05:32:27 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail.anarazel.de (mail.anarazel.de [217.115.131.40]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D60D6316A4 for ; Sat, 24 Jul 2010 02:32:27 -0300 (ADT) Received: by mail.anarazel.de (Postfix, from userid 108) id A0A44448005; Sat, 24 Jul 2010 07:32:25 +0200 (CEST) Received: from anarazel.de (e178195171.adsl.alicedsl.de [85.178.195.171]) by mail.anarazel.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 17528448005; Sat, 24 Jul 2010 07:32:22 +0200 (CEST) Received: by anarazel.de (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 55CEB1C00A0; Sat, 24 Jul 2010 07:32:22 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sat, 24 Jul 2010 07:32:22 +0200 From: Andres Freund To: Greg Smith Cc: Joshua Tolley , Scott Carey , Robert Haas , Craig Ringer , Matthew Wakeling , "pgsql-performance@postgresql.org" Subject: Re: Pooling in Core WAS: Need help in performance tuning. Message-ID: <20100724053222.GB22197@anarazel.de> References: <4C37EA1D.6000008@postnewspapers.com.au> <4C38BF03.6060503@agliodbs.com> <19244.1278787866@sss.pgh.pa.us> <4C3AF564.5030204@postnewspapers.com.au> <82DAA0BC-52E8-4279-81DF-14373755A42F@richrelevance.com> <4c49bb81.17bb720a.42c2.1de8@mx.google.com> <4C4A78BC.2020101@2ndquadrant.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4C4A78BC.2020101@2ndquadrant.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.91 tagged_above=-10 required=5 tests=BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 201007/346 X-Sequence-Number: 39735 On Sat, Jul 24, 2010 at 01:23:08AM -0400, Greg Smith wrote: > Joshua Tolley wrote: > >Relatively minor, but it would be convenient to avoid having to query > >$external_pooler to determine the client_addr of an incoming connection. > > You suggest this as a minor concern, but I consider it to be one of > the most compelling arguments in favor of in-core pooling. A > constant pain with external poolers is the need to then combine two > sources of data in order to track connections fully, which is > something that everyone runs into eventually and finds annoying. > It's one of the few things that doesn't go away no matter how much > fiddling you do with pgBouncer, it's always getting in the way a > bit. And it seems to seriously bother systems administrators and > developers, not just the DBAs. But you have to admit that this problem won't vanish as people will continue to use poolers on other machines for resource reasons. So providing a capability to do something sensible here seems to be useful independent of in-core pooling. Andres