Re: default resource limits

From: Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>
To: pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Subject: Re: default resource limits
Date: 2005-12-24 14:17:06
Message-ID: 200512240917.06699.xzilla@users.sourceforge.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

On Saturday 24 December 2005 06:22, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Am Samstag, 24. Dezember 2005 00:20 schrieb Andrew Dunstan:
> > The rationale is one connection per apache thread (which on Windows
> > defaults to 400). If people think this is too many I could live with
> > winding it back a bit - the defaults number of apache workers on Unix is
> > 250, IIRC.
>
> It's 150. I don't mind increasing the current 100 to 150, although I find
> tying this to apache pretty bogus.
>
> I really don't like the prospect of making the defaults platform specific,
> especially if the only rationale for that would be "apache does it". Why
> does apache allocate more connections on Windows anyway?
>

Maybe we should write something in to check if apache is installed if we're so
concerned about that usage... I already know that I set the connection limits
lower on most of the installations I do (given than most installations are
not production webservers). There is also the argument to be made that just
because systems these days have more memory doesn't mean we have to use it.

--
Robert Treat
Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Simon Riggs 2005-12-24 14:18:17 Re: [Bizgres-general] WAL bypass for INSERT, UPDATE and
Previous Message Martijn van Oosterhout 2005-12-24 11:50:27 Re: Fixing row comparison semantics

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Dunstan 2005-12-24 15:35:00 Re: [PATCHES] default resource limits
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2005-12-24 11:22:31 Re: default resource limits