Re: Proposal of tunable fix for scalability of 8.4

Gregory Stark wrote:
> "Jignesh K. Shah" <J(dot)K(dot)Shah(at)Sun(dot)COM> writes:
>
>
>> Scott Carey wrote:
>>
>>> On 3/12/09 11:37 AM, "Jignesh K. Shah" <J(dot)K(dot)Shah(at)Sun(dot)COM> wrote:
>>>
>>> In general, I suggest that it is useful to run tests with a few different
>>> types of pacing. Zero delay pacing will not have realistic number of
>>> connections, but will expose bottlenecks that are universal, and less
>>> controversial
>>>
>> I think I have done that before so I can do that again by running the users at
>> 0 think time which will represent a "Connection pool" which is highly utilized"
>> and test how big the connection pool can be before the throughput tanks.. This
>> can be useful for App Servers which sets up connections pools of their own
>> talking with PostgreSQL.
>>
>
> Keep in mind when you do this that it's not interesting to test a number of
> connections much larger than the number of processors you have. Once the
> system reaches 100% cpu usage it would be a misconfigured connection pooler
> that kept more than that number of connections open.
>
>

Greg, Unfortuately the problem is that.. I am trying to reach 100% CPU which I cannot and hence I am increasing the user count :-)

-Jignesh