Matthew Wakeling <matthew@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Tue, 12 May 2009, Simon Riggs wrote: >> No, we spawn then authenticate. > But you still have a single thread doing the accept() and spawn. At some > point (maybe not now, but in the future) this could become a bottleneck > given very short-lived connections. More to the point, each backend process is a pretty heavyweight object: it is a process, not a thread, and it's not going to be good for much until it's built up a reasonable amount of stuff in its private caches. I don't think the small number of cycles executed in the postmaster process amount to anything at all compared to the other overhead involved in getting a backend going. In short: executing a single query per connection is going to suck, and there is not anything we are going to do about it except to tell you to use a connection pooler. MySQL has a different architecture: thread per connection, and AFAIK whatever caches it has are shared across threads. So a connection is a lighter-weight object for them; but there's no free lunch. They pay for it in having to tolerate locking/contention overhead on operations that for us are backend-local. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
