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

Re: Peformance Tuning Opterons/ Hard Disk Layout

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Rod Taylor <pg(at)rbt(dot)ca>
Cc: Bruno Almeida do Lago <teolupus(at)gmail(dot)com>,"'Michael Adler'" <adler(at)pobox(dot)com>,Postgresql Performance <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Peformance Tuning Opterons/ Hard Disk Layout
Date: 2005-02-23 18:51:30
Message-ID: 21207.1109184690@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
Rod Taylor <pg(at)rbt(dot)ca> writes:
> The kernel also starts to play a significant role with a high number of
> connections. Some operating systems don't perform as well with a high
> number of processes (process handling, scheduling, file handles, etc.).

Right; the main problem with having lots more backends than you need is
that the idle ones still eat their share of RAM and open file handles.

A connection pooler uses relatively few resources per idle connection,
so it's a much better impedance match if you want to service lots of
connections that are mostly idle.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: John AllgoodDate: 2005-02-23 19:15:52
Subject: Re: Peformance Tuning Opterons/ Hard Disk Layout
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2005-02-23 18:37:28
Subject: Re: Peformance Tuning Opterons/ Hard Disk Layout

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