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

Re: Why is this system swapping?

From: Jeff <threshar(at)torgo(dot)978(dot)org>
To: Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>
Cc: "Anjan Dave" <adave(at)vantage(dot)com>,<pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Why is this system swapping?
Date: 2005-04-28 12:13:43
Message-ID: 2425e7a6ce717809d308bcc9591f6693@torgo.978.org (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
On Apr 27, 2005, at 7:46 PM, Greg Stark wrote:

> In fact I think it's generally superior to having a layer like pgpool 
> having
> to hand off all your database communication. Having to do an extra 
> context
> switch to handle every database communication is crazy.
>

I suppose this depends on how many machines / how much traffic you have.

In one setup I run here I get away with 32 * 4 db connections instead 
of 500 * 4. Pretty simple to see the savings on the db machine. (Yes, 
it is a "bad design" as you said where static & dynamic content are 
served from the same box. However it also saves money since I don't 
need machines sitting around serving up pixel.gif vs 
myBigApplication.cgi)

--
Jeff Trout <jeff(at)jefftrout(dot)com>
http://www.jefftrout.com/
http://www.stuarthamm.net/


In response to

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Mischa SandbergDate: 2005-04-28 15:00:53
Subject: Re: Suggestions for a data-warehouse migration routine
Previous:From: Dave PageDate: 2005-04-28 07:39:39
Subject: Re: Final decision

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