"Jignesh K. Shah" <J(dot)K(dot)Shah(at)Sun(dot)COM> writes:
> Note with this no think time concept, each clients can be about 75% CPU busy
> from what I observed. running it I found the clients scaling up saturates at
> about 60 now (compared to 500 from the original test). The peak throughput was
> at about 50 users (using synchrnous_commit=off)
So to get the maximum throughput on the benchmark with think times you want to
aggregate the clients about 10:1 with a connection pooler or some middleware
layer of some kind, it seems.
It's still interesting to find the choke points for large numbers of
connections. But I think not because it's limiting your benchmark results --
that would be better addressed by using fewer connections -- just for the sake
of knowing where problems loom on the horizon.
Ask me about EnterpriseDB's PostGIS support!
In response to
pgsql-performance by date
|Next:||From: Vlad Arkhipov||Date: 2008-05-30 11:02:41|
|Subject: Statistics issue|
|Previous:||From: Jignesh K. Shah||Date: 2008-05-29 22:08:10|
|Subject: ProcArrayLock (The Saga continues)|