Message-ID: <455D9B14.7030407@archonet.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2006 11:20:52 +0000
From: Richard Huxton <dev@archonet.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.7 (X11/20060918)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Jean-Max Reymond <jmreymond@gmail.com>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Keeping processes open for re-use
References: <5.1.0.14.0.20061109123348.0418fbb8@mailserver.dmr.co.uk>	
	<1163076964.2839.1.camel@coppola.muc.ecircle.de>	
	<4553DF77.7030000@007Marketing.com>	
	<1163125151.28784.154.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<4b09a0c0611160939h13be7da1n5a21def5f27fdae7@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <4b09a0c0611160939h13be7da1n5a21def5f27fdae7@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Jean-Max Reymond wrote:
> 2006/11/10, Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com>:
>>
>> I would actually suggest pg_pool over pg_pconnect.
>>
> 
> Please, can you explain advantages of pg_pool over pg_connect ?

He said pg_pconnect (note the extra "p"). This provides permanent 
connections to the database from PHP. However, you will end up with one 
connection per Apache process running (without running multiple Apache 
setups to serve different content types). Since many processes will be 
serving images or static content you have a lot of wasted, idle, 
connections.

Now, pg_pool allows you to maintain a small number of active connections 
(say 20 or 50) and have PHP connect to your pgpool server. It allocates 
the next free connection it holds and so lets you minimise the number of 
connections to PostgreSQL.

HTH
-- 
   Richard Huxton
   Archonet Ltd