Robert, On 11/15/2010 05:39 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > I've spent a few hours pouring over the source code with > coarse-toothed comb, trying to figure out just exactly what might > break if we changed MyDatabaseId after backend startup time, or in > other words, allowed a backend to unbind from the database to which it > was originally bound and rebind to a new one. This is related to the > periodic conversations we've had about a built-in connection pooler, > and/or maintaining a pool of worker threads that could be used to > service parallel query, replication sets, etc. What follows is not > meant to be a concrete design proposal; it's basic research that may > lead to a proposal at some time in the future. Still, comments are > welcome.
Thanks a lot for doing that, saved me a couple hours (presumably more than it cost you :-) > Thoughts? The question obviously is whether or not this is faster than just terminating one backend and starting a new one. Which basically costs an additional termination and re-creation of a process (i.e. fork()) AFAICS. Or what other savings do you envision? If that's it, it certainly seems like a huge amount of work for very little benefit. Or does this feature enable something that's impossible to do otherwise? Regards Markus Wanner -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
