| From: | belal hamed <belalhamed(at)gmail(dot)com> | 
|---|---|
| To: | David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> | 
| Cc: | "ktm(at)rice(dot)edu" <ktm(at)rice(dot)edu>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org | 
| Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL over internet | 
| Date: | 2013-01-28 11:15:10 | 
| Message-ID: | CAHsqH1zpVdF0reVjtxg8uZOUfvYy876gXg8n+Z2k1TXaN_ekXw@mail.gmail.com | 
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email | 
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance | 
>Due to the asymmetric communication, a bigger data output in a single
>packet (the result of using compression on the tunnel) will get sent
>without waiting. A smaller packet will delay a bit waiting for some
>additional data, which in your case does not come. You may want to
>check out this document describing some of what I believe is causing
>your observed behavior:
Slow
Fast
As I said before I try a small query and big one the result same using IP
Tunnel is fast.
>You would find that if you log in to your DB server and use libpq
>to it over a localhost connection that the performance is good which
>points to your network as the problem.
when I said I connect to localhost I meant I connect to IP tunnel client
witch connect me to the remote PGServer
>Are you sure there's not any QOS somewhere that is slowing down the packets
>for port 5432 or whichever you're using for PostgreSQL?
>Perhaps temporarily changing PostgreSQL's listening port to something else
>might be a good test.
yes I am sure, and if there is any it must affect both test.
Best regards to all.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Craig James | 2013-01-28 18:54:20 | Triggers and transactions | 
| Previous Message | David Rowley | 2013-01-27 20:23:24 | Re: PostgreSQL over internet |