Re: [TIPS] Tuning PostgreSQL 9.2

From: Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "drum(dot)lucas(at)gmail(dot)com" <drum(dot)lucas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Payal Singh <payal(at)omniti(dot)com>, Scott Whitney <scott(at)journyx(dot)com>, "pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [TIPS] Tuning PostgreSQL 9.2
Date: 2016-04-12 01:55:39
Message-ID: CAOR=d=1dQ61Gs8rFfsafU_C9vB9PsWQEzKf-ix=Gwzapzzv+Vg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-admin

On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 6:20 PM, drum(dot)lucas(at)gmail(dot)com
<drum(dot)lucas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> pgbouncer is kinda happy living almost anywhere.
>>
>> Putting it on separate vms means you can reconfigure when needed for
>> say another db or web server without having to edit anything but the
>> pgbouncer vms.
>>
>> Putting it on the db servers means that if a db server goes down then
>> you need to reconfigure the app side to not look for them
>>
>> Putting them on the app side means you have to configured according to
>> how many app servers you have etc.
>>
>> It all really depends on your use cases. but putting it on the www
>> servers works fine and is how I've done it many times in the past.
>
>
> Thanks for the reply...
>
> But as I'm using two web servers, do I have to put pgbouncer on both of
> them?
>
> Not sure how is going to work as I have two web servers

Either way will work. The advantage to having one on each is that
connections are simpler to configure and if one goes fown you still
have pgbouncer running

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-admin by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message drum.lucas@gmail.com 2016-04-12 03:17:23 Re: [TIPS] Tuning PostgreSQL 9.2
Previous Message drum.lucas@gmail.com 2016-04-12 00:20:47 Re: [TIPS] Tuning PostgreSQL 9.2