| From: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Deshpande, Yogesh Sadashiv (STSD-Openview)" <yogesh-sadashiv(dot)deshpande(at)hp(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Postgre Performance |
| Date: | 2011-10-18 17:18:14 |
| Message-ID: | 4E9DB4D6.3060607@commandprompt.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On 10/18/2011 06:57 AM, Deshpande, Yogesh Sadashiv (STSD-Openview) wrote:
> Hello ,
>
> We have a setup where in there are around 100 process running in
> parallel every 5 minutes and each one of them opens a connection to
> database. We are observing that for each connection , postgre also
> created on sub processes. We have set max_connection to 100. So the
> number of sub process in the system is close to 200 every 5 minutes. And
> because of this we are seeing very high CPU usage. We need following
> information
>
> 1.Is there any configuration we do that would pool the connection
> request rather than coming out with connection limit exceed.
Yes you need a pooler. Initiating connections like that is expensive.
The use of PgBouncer is your friend here.
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PgBouncer
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
--
Command Prompt, Inc. - http://www.commandprompt.com/
PostgreSQL Support, Training, Professional Services and Development
The PostgreSQL Conference - http://www.postgresqlconference.org/
@cmdpromptinc - @postgresconf - 509-416-6579
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Deshpande, Yogesh Sadashiv (STSD-Openview) | 2011-10-18 17:38:19 | Re: Postgre Performance |
| Previous Message | Raghavendra | 2011-10-18 17:03:02 | Re: Postgre Performance |