Re: Performance under contention
От | Ivan Voras |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Performance under contention |
Дата | |
Msg-id | ice2pd$ae8$1@dough.gmane.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Performance under contention ("Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>) |
Ответы |
Re: Performance under contention
|
Список | pgsql-performance |
On 11/22/10 16:26, Kevin Grittner wrote: > Ivan Voras<ivoras@freebsd.org> wrote: >> On 11/22/10 02:47, Kevin Grittner wrote: >>> Ivan Voras wrote: >>> >>>> After 16 clients (which is still good since there are only 12 >>>> "real" cores in the system), the performance drops sharply >>> >>> Yet another data point to confirm the importance of connection >>> pooling. :-) >> >> I agree, connection pooling will get rid of the symptom. But not >> the underlying problem. I'm not saying that having 1000s of >> connections to the database is a particularly good design, only >> that there shouldn't be a sharp decline in performance when it >> does happen. Ideally, the performance should remain the same as it >> was at its peek. > > Well, I suggested that we add an admission control[1] mechanism, It looks like a hack (and one which is already implemented by connection pool software); the underlying problem should be addressed. But on the other hand if it's affecting so many people, maybe a warning comment in postgresql.conf around max_connections would be helpful.
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: