Re: Are many idle connections bad?
| От | Tom Lane |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Are many idle connections bad? |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 8824.1437836691@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение |
| Ответ на | Are many idle connections bad? (Craig James <cjames@emolecules.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Are many idle connections bad?
|
| Список | pgsql-performance |
Craig James <cjames@emolecules.com> writes:
> ... This would result in a thousand
> or so Postgres connections on a machine with 32 CPUs.
> So the question is: do idle connections impact performance?
Yes. Those connections have to be examined when gathering snapshot
information, since you don't know that they're idle until you look.
So the cost of taking a snapshot is proportional to the total number
of connections, even when most are idle. This sort of situation
is known to aggravate contention for the ProcArrayLock, which is a
performance bottleneck if you've got lots of CPUs.
You'd be a lot better off with a pooler.
(There has been, and continues to be, interest in getting rid of this
bottleneck ... but it's a problem in all existing Postgres versions.)
regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: