From: | "Benjamin Krajmalnik" <kraj(at)illumen(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | <pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Max connections |
Date: | 2009-08-11 16:40:10 |
Message-ID: | F4E6A2751A2823418A21D4A160B689883FCD91@fletch.stackdump.local |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-admin |
Tom,
This exercise is exactly to help us size our production server, but I
appreciate what you are saying.
I am using pgbouncer, but my understanding is that I need to make as
many potential connections available on the server side as the maximum
pool size - I will shoot them an email to get some guidance.
As always, thank you so much for your assistance.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2009 7:54 AM
> To: Benjamin Krajmalnik
> Cc: pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org
> Subject: Re: [ADMIN] Max connections
>
> "Benjamin Krajmalnik" <kraj(at)illumen(dot)com> writes:
> > I am setting up a test environment to simulate a very high load. We
> > have a server farm which is receiving data (cold be thousands of
> > simultaneous users posting data). I currently have max_connections
> set
> > to 500 and the server is starting ok. If I try to increase the
> > max_connections to 1000, the server is unable to start. I am
running
> a
> > VM with 4GB RAM. Swap space is not being used, and the system is
> > showing about 1.5GB of ram not being utilized.
>
> Quite honestly, you're living in fantasy land if you expect to support
> 1000 concurrently active backends on such a restricted server. Get
> yourself a connection pooler and knock down max_connections to 100 or
> so.
>
> regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Kevin Kempter | 2009-08-11 17:14:07 | Re: replay WAL segments without a "base backup" ? |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2009-08-11 15:49:14 | Re: replay WAL segments without a "base backup" ? |