Bob Dusek wrote: >>> The problem with our "cheap" connection pool is that the persistent >>> connections don't seem to be available immediately after they're >>> released by the previous process. pg_close doesn't seem to help the >>> situation. We understand that pg_close doesn't really close a >>> persistent connection, but we were hoping that it would cleanly >>> release it for another client to use. Curious. >> Yeah, the persistent connects in php are kinda as dangerous as they >> are useful.. Have you tried using regular connects just to compare >> performance? On Linux they're not too bad, but on Windows (the pg >> server that is) it's pretty horrible performance-wise. > > Yes we have. Regular connections are pretty slow, even when our > application server is on the same box as the db server. > >>> We've also tried third-party connection pools and they don't seem to >>> be real fast. >> What have you tried? Would pgbouncer work for you? > > We've tried pgbouncer. It's pretty good. Oh, also look into mod_dbd . With the threaded MPM it can apparently provide excellent in-apache connection pooling. -- Craig Ringer -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
