| From: | Mark Kirkwood <markir(at)paradise(dot)net(dot)nz> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Jonah H(dot) Harris" <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com>, Shiva Sarna <shivasarna(at)yahoo(dot)co(dot)in>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: increasing database connections |
| Date: | 2007-03-01 07:07:06 |
| Message-ID: | 45E67B9A.8030209@paradise.net.nz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Jonah H. Harris wrote:
>> On 3/1/07, Shiva Sarna <shivasarna(at)yahoo(dot)co(dot)in> wrote:
>>> I am sorry if it is a repeat question but I want to know if database
>>> performance will decrease if I increase the max-connections to 2000. At
>>> present it is 100.
>> Most certainly. Adding connections over 200 will degrade performance
>> dramatically. You should look into pgpool or connection pooling from
>> the application.
>
> huh? That is certainly not my experience. I have systems that show no
> depreciable performance hit on even 1000+ connections. To be fair to the
> discussion, these are on systems with 4+ cores. Usually 8+ and
> significant ram 16/32 gig fo ram.
Yeah - I thought that somewhere closer to 10000 connections is where you
get hit with socket management related performance issues.
Cheers
Mark
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Magnus Hagander | 2007-03-01 08:58:24 | Re: increasing database connections |
| Previous Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2007-03-01 06:18:18 | Re: increasing database connections |