Client is missing in error handling about node-pg-pool HOT 6 CLOSED

Yeah I think that strategy is good! You might want to add user and password to the uniqueness of a given pool...but I'm not 100% sure about that. It seems like if I wanted to connect to the same database w/ different users I'd expect their connections to be different, but maybe pg-promise takes care of that.

I'm going to leave this issue open so I can be reminded to add the client instance as the 2nd parameter to the error callback. While it is on the error parameter as a property, I agree with you its nicer to be its own thing.

from node-pg-pool.

Yah that makes total sense & was likely an oversight on my part.

Just to make sure I'm clear: what you're saying is you want this:

const Pool = require('pg').Pool
const pool = new Pool()
pool.on('error', (error, client) => {
  // client should be the client that threw the error
  // but it's currently null
})

right?

If that's what you're proposing that should be an easy fix!

from node-pg-pool.

@brianc Further investigation just showed me that when we get that connection-related error, err is an error object that also happens to have property client set to the right Client object.

That kind of takes care of it, in a sense that I can use it that way, not that it is the best way to do it, because:

• throwing it into a console or log creates a much larger output, with the Client rendered as extra
• still inconsistent with how the event is fired in the older way that still works

right?

Yep 😄

from node-pg-pool.

@brianc While you are here, may I ask a related question?

As within pg-promise the new pool is used automatically, do you think the following strategy is the best one?

For each new triplet of host + port + database I automatically create a new Pool object, and that's how the new pools are being used.

from node-pg-pool.

@brianc Thanks, Brian! I do not use user name + password, on the assumption that a separate connection pool on such a granular level would become too fragmented in terms of resources, and thus uncontrollable, i.e. it is better to tweak the size of the pool on the database level, and leave it at that, as far as the generic solutions go. You still get a good connectivity boost and isolation when using different servers / databases.

To make it better, you would have to manually control the pool creation strategy, which In my case isn't suitable, as the connectivity in pg-promise is fully automatic.

P.S. Please make sure that if you move the Client into a parameter, it requires a new release of node-postgres, so I can upgrade the library accordingly, with the code, without it ending up broken silently because the error object no longer has property client.

from node-pg-pool.

@brianc it seems we have the same issue within the core driver, when creating a Client directly, as per this question: brianc/node-postgres#1351

from node-pg-pool.