From: | Kevin Barnard <kevin(dot)barnard(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Martin Foster <martin(at)ethereal-realms(dot)org> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [PERFORM] Restricting Postgres |
Date: | 2004-11-04 16:00:38 |
Message-ID: | b068057c041104080051ccc451@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-performance |
I am generally interested in a good solution for this. So far our
solution has been to increase the hardware to the point of allowing
800 connections to the DB.
I don't have the mod loaded for Apache, but we haven't had too many
problems there. The site is split pretty good between dynamic and
non-dynamic, it's largely Flash with several plugins to the DB.
However we still can and have been slammed and up to point of the 800
connections.
What I don't get is why not use pgpool? This should eliminate the
rapid fire forking of postgres instanaces in the DB server. I'm
assuming you app can safely handle a failure to connect to the DB
(i.e. exceed number of DB connections). If not it should be fairly
simple to send a 503 header when it's unable to get the connection.
On Thu, 04 Nov 2004 08:17:22 -0500, Martin Foster
<martin(at)ethereal-realms(dot)org> wrote:
> Apache has a global setting for load average limits, the above was just
> a module which extended the capability. It might also make sense to
> have limitations set on schema's which can be used in a similar way to
> Apache directories.
>
> While for most people the database protecting itself against a sudden
> surge of high traffic would be undesirable. It can help those who run
> dynamically driven sites and get slammed by Slashdot for example.
>
>
>
> Martin Foster
> Creator/Designer Ethereal Realms
> martin(at)ethereal-realms(dot)org
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Martin Foster | 2004-11-04 16:15:12 | Re: Restricting Postgres |
Previous Message | Matthew T. O'Connor | 2004-11-04 15:48:04 | Re: VACUUMING questions... |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Martin Foster | 2004-11-04 16:15:12 | Re: Restricting Postgres |
Previous Message | Chris Browne | 2004-11-04 15:47:31 | Re: Anything to be gained from a 'Postgres Filesystem'? |