| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Rod Taylor <pg(at)rbt(dot)ca> |
| Cc: | Bruno Almeida do Lago <teolupus(at)gmail(dot)com>, "'Michael Adler'" <adler(at)pobox(dot)com>, Postgresql Performance <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Peformance Tuning Opterons/ Hard Disk Layout |
| Date: | 2005-02-23 18:51:30 |
| Message-ID: | 21207.1109184690@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Rod Taylor <pg(at)rbt(dot)ca> writes:
> The kernel also starts to play a significant role with a high number of
> connections. Some operating systems don't perform as well with a high
> number of processes (process handling, scheduling, file handles, etc.).
Right; the main problem with having lots more backends than you need is
that the idle ones still eat their share of RAM and open file handles.
A connection pooler uses relatively few resources per idle connection,
so it's a much better impedance match if you want to service lots of
connections that are mostly idle.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | John Allgood | 2005-02-23 19:15:52 | Re: Peformance Tuning Opterons/ Hard Disk Layout |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-02-23 18:37:28 | Re: Peformance Tuning Opterons/ Hard Disk Layout |