Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Postgres Server collapse

From: imad <immaad(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Michael Paesold" <mpaesold(at)gmx(dot)at>
Cc: Sistemasvi <sistemasvi(at)aerogal(dot)com(dot)ec>, pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Postgres Server collapse
Date: 2006-11-28 09:42:34
Message-ID: 1f30b80c0611280142p1ad554e0j18cc72f1a2e55810@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-jdbc
Ok sorry.
I missed that "session" thing.

--Imad
www.EnterpriseDB.com


On 11/28/06, Michael Paesold <mpaesold(at)gmx(dot)at> wrote:
> imad schrieb:
> > On 11/27/06, Sistemasvi <sistemasvi(at)aerogal(dot)com(dot)ec> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> Hello.
> >>
> >> I have a postsgresql database with max 500 connections. All
> >> development is
> >> in Java (View, Model, controller model). The problem is when I have high
> >> traffic (about 10 AM) when the database server collapse. The server
> >> turn too
> >> slow as It havenĀ“t memory and the swap memory increase too much. I
> >> must kill
> >> all postgres connections and restart postmaster service.
> >>
> >> I have only one connection by web session. It is good or bad?
> >
> > One connection only? Then why did you increased the number of connections
> > to 800? Sorry, I might be missing some point here.
>
> Strip "only" to understand the sentence. ;-)
>
> Carlos has one open DB connection for each open "web" (i.e. Webbrowser)
> session, which means that there are way too many connections open for a
> great number of currently waiting sessions. A connection pool should
> alleviate the problems.
>
> Best Regards
> Michael Paesold
>
>

In response to

pgsql-jdbc by date

Next:From: Altaf MalikDate: 2006-11-28 09:46:27
Subject: Re: Postgres Server collapse
Previous:From: Michael PaesoldDate: 2006-11-28 09:33:00
Subject: Re: Postgres Server collapse

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group