From: | Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | gelin yan <dynamicgl(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: server process (PID 1304) was terminated by exception 0xC0000142 |
Date: | 2012-10-08 15:22:20 |
Message-ID: | CAOR=d=2xvw7E2Fei16ZSskstpbnUytkQqL3vZNV4w8BwUd4zJg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 1:36 AM, gelin yan <dynamicgl(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 1:56 PM, Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>
> wrote:
>> If the OP needs > 100 connections on the app end, he should add a
>> connection pooler like pgbouncer or pgpool. pgbouncer is the easier
>> of the two to configure.
>
>
>
> Hi
>
> I have ran a PG 9.1 instance on windows 7 for one year flawlessly, My
> max_connection is 100 only. It is a high load app. I think increasing
> connection number doesn't help due to pg's architecture. As other guys said,
> it is better to use sth like conn pool to manage connections.
>
> BTW, you can check:
>
> http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Running_%26_Installing_PostgreSQL_On_Native_Windows
>
> it mention why pg can't launch more that 125 connections on windows. I think
> this point is still valid today.
Yeah the problems with running pg on non unix platforms is all the
OTHER stuff, like pgbouncer / pgpool and so on that may or may not
support windows or are only partially supported. And yeah I think the
limit for connections is still there, but there may be a kernel
configuration hack to overcome it.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Seref Arikan | 2012-10-08 20:14:58 | Suggestions for the best strategy to emulate returning multiple sets of results |
Previous Message | Marko Kreen | 2012-10-08 08:05:54 | Re: [Pgbouncer-general] Again, problem with pgbouncer |