From: | "Mark Wong" <markwkm(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> |
Cc: | "Gabrielle Roth" <gorthx(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Selena Deckelmann" <selenamarie(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: dbt-2 tuning results with postgresql-8.3.5 |
Date: | 2009-01-14 03:49:25 |
Message-ID: | 70c01d1d0901131949w545ba12ej10705784d0d7010a@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 7:40 AM, Kevin Grittner
<Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> wrote:
>>>> "Mark Wong" <markwkm(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
>> It appears to peak around 220 database connections:
>>
>> http://pugs.postgresql.org/node/514
>
> Interesting. What did you use for connection pooling?
It's a fairly dumb but custom built C program for the test kit:
http://git.postgresql.org/?p=~markwkm/dbt2.git;a=summary
I think the bulk of the logic is in src/client.c, src/db_threadpool.c,
and src/transaction_queue.c.
> My tests have never stayed that flat as the connections in use
> climbed. I'm curious why we're seeing such different results.
I'm sure the difference in workloads makes a difference. Like you
implied earlier, I think we have to figure out what works best in for
our own workloads.
Regards,
Mark
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Maksim Sosnovskiy | 2009-01-14 05:53:52 | index |
Previous Message | Jeff Frost | 2009-01-13 23:44:00 | Re: strange index behaviour with different statistics target |