From: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | "Jonah H(dot) Harris" <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Shiva Sarna <shivasarna(at)yahoo(dot)co(dot)in>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: increasing database connections |
Date: | 2007-03-01 08:58:24 |
Message-ID: | 20070301085824.GB27639@svr2.hagander.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Thu, Mar 01, 2007 at 12:49:14AM -0500, Jonah H. Harris wrote:
> On 3/1/07, Shiva Sarna <shivasarna(at)yahoo(dot)co(dot)in> wrote:
> >I am sorry if it is a repeat question but I want to know if database
> >performance will decrease if I increase the max-connections to 2000. At
> >present it is 100.
>
> Most certainly. Adding connections over 200 will degrade performance
> dramatically. You should look into pgpool or connection pooling from
> the application.
Are you sure? I've heard of at least one installation which runs with
5000+ connections, and it works fine. (you know who you are - I don't
know if it's public info, so I can't put out the details - but feel free
to fill in :P)
That said, there's certainly some overhead, and using pgpool if possible
is good advice (depending on workload). I'm just wondering about
the "dramatically" part.
//Magnus
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Ben Trewern | 2007-03-01 11:00:38 | Re: performances with Pentium D |
Previous Message | Mark Kirkwood | 2007-03-01 07:07:06 | Re: increasing database connections |