On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 11:40:59AM +0300, Konstantin Knizhnik wrote: > > Sorry, may we do not understand each other. > There are the following facts: > 1. There are some entities in Postgres which are local to a backend: > temporary tables, GUCs, prepared statement, relation and catalog caches,... > 2. Postgres doesn't "like" larger number of backends. Even only few of them > are actually active. Large number of backends means large procarray, large > snapshots,... > Please refere to my measurement at the beginning of this thread which > illustrate how performance of Pastgres degrades with increasing number of > backends.
So, instead of trying to multiplex multiple sessions in a single operating system process, why don't we try to reduce the overhead of idle sessions that each have an operating system process? We already use procArray to reduce the number of _assigned_ PGPROC entries we have to scan. Why can't we create another array that only contains _active_ sessions, i.e. those not in a transaction. In what places can procArray scans be changed to use this new array? -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. + + Ancient Roman grave inscription +
