Re: scaling up postgres
| От | David Boreham |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: scaling up postgres |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 4481A856.7050907@boreham.org обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: scaling up postgres (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
| Ответы |
Re: scaling up postgres
|
| Список | pgsql-performance |
Tom Lane wrote:
was using persistent database connections or not (obviously better if so).
If it were the case that his setup is new backend launch rate-limited, then
wouldn't the machine show CPU saturation ? (he said it didn't).
I thought the OP was talking about HTTP connections/s. He didn't say if hefzied@planet.tn writes:I'm using httperf/autobench for measurments and the best result I can get is that my system can handle a trafiic of almost 1600 New con/sec.As per PFC's comment, if connections/sec is a bottleneck for you then the answer is to use persistent connections. Launching a new backend is a fairly heavyweight operation in Postgres.
was using persistent database connections or not (obviously better if so).
If it were the case that his setup is new backend launch rate-limited, then
wouldn't the machine show CPU saturation ? (he said it didn't).
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: