| From: | Achilleas Mantzios <achill(at)matrix(dot)gatewaynet(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-admin(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: pgpool versus which tool? |
| Date: | 2018-10-15 10:34:41 |
| Message-ID: | d7bf0b86-bee9-f411-df26-de54c74352ad@matrix.gatewaynet.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin |
In the case of PAM authentication (the only way to do LDAP authentication) pgbouncer is haunted by some nasty bug(s) : https://github.com/pgbouncer/pgbouncer/issues/285
I don't know if pgpool handles PAM better under stress.
On 15/10/18 1:00 μ.μ., Prince Pathria wrote:
> Hey Pierre,
>
> go for pgBouncer if you want transaction based pooling and if your sole aim to use pgPool is for pooling then better go for pgBouncer.
> pgBouncer performs 3x better than pgpool-II in benchmarking results.
>
> Thanks!
> Prince Pathria
> Systems Architect Evive +91 9478670472 goevive.com <http://goevive.com>
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 1:52 PM Thomas Kellerer <spam_eater(at)gmx(dot)net <mailto:spam_eater(at)gmx(dot)net>> wrote:
>
> Pierre Ochsenbein schrieb am 15.10.2018 um 09:38:
> > Which best of tool you recommend to replace pgpool?
> What's wrong with pgPool that you think you need to replace it?
>
> And what is you requirement for such a tool?
>
--
Achilleas Mantzios
IT DEV Lead
IT DEPT
Dynacom Tankers Mgmt
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Celeste Mavoula | 2018-10-15 10:51:58 | I need a support |
| Previous Message | pavan95 | 2018-10-15 10:11:03 | Re: Hick ups in Postgresql Logical Replication |