> Uhm... I always thought that sharing the same socket between
> processes is wrong.
Well, I've never thought about it before this problem, but it definitely
appears to me like something not to do. Sharing remote object doesn't sound
right :-(
> My multi-process daemon works like apache with a p
Sébastien Bonnet wrote:
>
> Hi all, and mainly postresql developpers,
>
> I've been reading old posts about the libpq interface related to multi-process
> application. The main problem being that after a fork, each process has a DB
> connexion, actually the same. If one closes it, the other one
Hi all, and mainly postresql developpers,
I've been reading old posts about the libpq interface related to multi-process
application. The main problem being that after a fork, each process has a DB
connexion, actually the same. If one closes it, the other one remains in a
unknown or not stable st
