On Thu, 27 Oct 2011 12:43:00 -0700, John R Pierce wrote:
> On 10/27/11 11:39 AM, Brian Fehrle wrote:
>>
>> I've got a system that has 32 cores and 128 gigs of ram. We have
>> connection pooling set up, with about 100 - 200 persistent connections
>> open to the database. Our applications then use these connections to
>> query the database constantly, but when a connection isn't currently
>> executing a query, it's <IDLE>. On average, at any given time, there
>> are 3 - 6 connections that are actually executing a query, while the
>> rest are <IDLE>.
>
>
> thats not a very effective use of pooling. the pooling model, you'd
> have a connection pool sufficient actual database connections to
> satisfy your concurrency requirements, and your apps would grab a
> connection from the pool, do a transaction, then release the
> connection back to the pool.
>
> now, I don't know that this has anything to do with your performance
> problem, I'm just pointing out this anomaly. a pool doesn't do much
> good if the clients grab a connection and just sit on it.
>
>
> --
> john r pierce N 37, W 122
> santa cruz ca mid-left coast
It is good model, he have 3-6 connection at one time, so it's look
quite clear that icrease of concurrent connections is caused by
unexpected background processing.