On Sat, May 7, 2011 at 7:39 PM, Tatsuo Ishii <[email protected]> wrote:
> Yes. You could safely reduce max_pool to 1. > Will do, thanks. > In order to ensure minimum memory footprint I guess I'm looking at > something > > like an apache style dynamic allocation of children when needed (say when > > requests start filling queues of current children's pools). > > Does this make sense? Is there a way to replicate (pun intended) this > > behavior? > > I think child_life_time can be used to obtain similar behavior. If > client is idle for child_life_time seconds, the pgpool child process > exits and release the memory, new one will be created. So you could > save memory while the pgpool child allocated in its lifetime. Of > course this does not save memory when pgpool child freshly started > though. > How does child_life_time interact with connection_life_time? Let's say after 300 seconds the connection closes, and after 600 seconds the child exits... does the newly spawned child re-open the connection automatically or not? Regards, ED
_______________________________________________ Pgpool-general mailing list [email protected] http://pgfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/pgpool-general
