| From: | Kristjan Mustkivi <sonicmonkey(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Scott Ribe <scott_ribe(at)elevated-dev(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-admin(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Pgbouncer pool_mode and application behavior |
| Date: | 2022-06-14 05:53:04 |
| Message-ID: | CAOQPKasiV_pDg3R0TU8ZSEoQc6A02OAyOKJrKCngWtgrhHeebw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin |
Thank you, Scott!
On Mon, Jun 13, 2022 at 5:33 PM Scott Ribe <scott_ribe(at)elevated-dev(dot)com> wrote:
>
> > On Jun 13, 2022, at 8:04 AM, Kristjan Mustkivi <sonicmonkey(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > Am I correct to guess, that pgbouncer in this case in
> > pool_mode=session does not help at all and in order to improve
> > throughput, server engineers really must implement support for
> > transaction mode that pgbouncer provides?
>
> You are correct that session mode will not solve the problem you described. There are 3 possibilities:
>
> - as you mentioned, changed clients to be compatible with pgbouncer transaction pooling
>
> - increase pg max_connections
>
> - increase timeouts, use retries, etc so that the servers are more resilient to being temporarily denied connections
--
Kristjan Mustkivi
Email: kristjan(dot)mustkivi(at)gmail(dot)com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Nikhil Shetty | 2022-06-14 11:58:17 | Re: Recovery conflict due to buffer pins |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2022-06-13 18:30:44 | Re: Recovery conflict due to buffer pins |