On 4/17/06, Perrin Harkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, 2006-04-09 at 22:14 -0500, Frank Wiles wrote: > > I'd suggest trying pgpool without Apache::DBI also. Using both you're > > essentially pooling twice for no real reason. > > Not really. Apache::DBI just provides persistent connections. This > pgpool thing is trying to actually share a limited number of connections > between a larger set of client processes. Using it with Apache::DBI or > DBI->connect_cached() makes sense. > > - Perrin
Maybe someone could write Apache::DBI::pooled which would maintain a smaller number of persistent connections and provide them to the client processes as needed intstead of maintaining a persistent connection for each client process. The approach would make sense when there is a limit on the number of available slots at the server and that limit is lower than the number of processes. The data load will be exactly the same, although it might be smoother as a client could block until there is an available connection during periods of high load instead of making more simultaneous requests on the server. -- David L Nicol Can you remember when vending machines took pennies?
