Re: [ADMIN] When postgres will be faster?

From: Oleg Bartunov <oleg(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)su>
To: Marcin Mazurek - Multinet SA - Poznan <m(dot)mazurek(at)multinet(dot)pl>
Cc: pgsql-admin(at)postgreSQL(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [ADMIN] When postgres will be faster?
Date: 1999-11-29 15:04:54
Message-ID: Pine.GSO.3.96.SK.991129174302.27572N-100000@ra
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

I'm not concern very much about speed of Postgres but mostly
about its connection schema. Every new connect to database postgres
forks another children. It's impossible to work with different
databases. On my production site I work with persistent connections
between http (mod_perl) <-> postgres and quite satisfies with efficiency -
I have 20 httpd running and 20 db backends accordingly.
This requires some memory, but I could live. Now other developers
want to use postgres as a db backend in their Web applications and
also want to have persistence to some another databases.
If you have N databases and M httpd servers, you will end with
N*M DB backends. This is too much and I'm afraid my solution
could be scalable. MySQL seems could works with several databases.
I don't know if it's possible to have a pool of db childrens,
which connected to, say, template1 database and children could
switch to requested database on demand. This would require some
modification of DBD driver of course, but I think it's not hard.
I'm working on very big project with many databases involved,
current traffic is more than 2 mln. pageviews and most of them
dynamic. We expect about 5x more requests and I really need scalable
solution. Is anybody working on COBRA interface to postgres ?
CORBA is just a magic word for me :-) Could it be a magic wand ?

Regards,

Oleg

On Mon, 29 Nov 1999, Marcin Mazurek - Multinet SA - Poznan wrote:

> Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 14:27:55 +0100 (CET)
> From: Marcin Mazurek - Multinet SA - Poznan <m(dot)mazurek(at)multinet(dot)pl>
> Cc: pgsql-admin(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
> Subject: Re: [ADMIN] When postgres will be faster?
>
> On Mon, 29 Nov 1999 sk(dot)list(at)comset(dot)net wrote:
> > Yes! But I recommend backend pool too. What is it? The postmaster task runs now
> > backend for each query. Good. But After query backend finished. I recommend to
> > stay backend running within a some timeout. If the next query occured
> > the postmaster redirect query to any idle backend or run a new one unless. Then
> > backend serve some connections it shut down itself, this prevents memory leaks.
> Somebody advised me to do such thing with servlets, holding pool of
> connections in one srvlet and give them as they are needed, but frankly
> speaking i have no idea how to do it. Does anybodyhas such examples with
> Connection pools?
> mazek
>
> Marcin Mazurek
>
> --
> administrator
> MULTINET SA o/Poznan
> http://www.multinet.pl/
>
>
> ************
>

_____________________________________________________________
Oleg Bartunov, sci.researcher, hostmaster of AstroNet,
Sternberg Astronomical Institute, Moscow University (Russia)
Internet: oleg(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)su, http://www.sai.msu.su/~megera/
phone: +007(095)939-16-83, +007(095)939-23-83

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Oleg Broytmann 1999-11-29 15:29:09 Re: [HACKERS] Re: [ADMIN] When postgres will be faster?
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 1999-11-29 14:54:04 Re: [HACKERS] Development installation fails