Tom Lane wrote: > > As it is now, the patch doesn't keep two connections open. It remembers > > the index of the host of the first successful writable connection, but > > closes the connection, and opens another one to that host if no read-only > > host can be found. > > Oh! The reason I assumed it wasn't doing that is that such a behavior > seems completely insane. If the point is to keep down the load on your > master server, then connecting only to immediately disconnect is not > a friendly way to do that --- even without counting the fact that you > might later come back and connect again.
That's why I had argued initially to keep the session open, but you seem to dislike that idea as well. > If that's the best we can do, we should forget the whole feature and > just recommend putting slave servers first in your hosts list when > you want prefer-slave. If you know which is which, certainly. But in a setup with automated failover you cannot be certain which is which. That's what the proposed feature targets. Yours, Laurenz Albe