Re: Extensibility of the PostgreSQL wire protocol

Dave Cramer <davecramer@postgres.rocks>

From: Dave Cramer <davecramer@postgres.rocks>

To: Álvaro Hernández <aht@ongres.com>

Cc: Jan Wieck <jan@wi3ck.info>, Damir Simunic <damir.simunic@gmail.com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, "Jonah H. Harris" <jonah.harris@gmail.com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>

Date: 2021-02-22T12:34:51Z

Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, 19 Feb 2021 at 15:39, Álvaro Hernández <aht@ongres.com> wrote:

>
>
> On 19/2/21 19:30, Jan Wieck wrote:
> > [...]
> >
> > I also am not sure if building a connection pool into a background
> > worker or postmaster is a good idea to begin with. One of the
> > important features of a pool is to be able to suspend traffic and make
> > the server completely idle to for example be able to restart the
> > postmaster without forcibly disconnecting all clients. A pool built
> > into a background worker cannot do that.
> >
> >
>



Yes, when did it become a good idea to put a connection pooler in the
backend???

Dave Cramer
www.postgres.rocks