From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Durumdara <durumdara(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Postgres General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: PGBench on Windows - connections are subprocesses? |
Date: | 2020-07-20 13:38:10 |
Message-ID: | 401420.1595252290@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Durumdara <durumdara(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> But the number of threads option (j I think) confused me. At first I
> thought the total connection number is simply the multiplication of c and j
> (subconnections).
> As I saw this is untrue.
> So I don't know how this utility works really in the background.
There are -j threads in the pgbench process, and -c connections to
the server (hence -c backend processes on the server side). Each
of the pgbench threads is responsible for sending queries to a subset
of the connections. Setting -j more than -c is useless (I forget
if it's actually an error). If you set -j to, say, half of -c then
each thread has exactly two connections to manage. If -j is too
small compared to -c then pgbench itself tends to become the bottleneck.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Durumdara | 2020-07-20 13:38:14 | Re: PGBench on Windows - connections are subprocesses? |
Previous Message | Adrian Klaver | 2020-07-20 13:37:56 | Re: Steps required for increasing disk size in EC2 instance with minimal downtime |