| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Miernik <public(at)public(dot)miernik(dot)name> |
| Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: how to fix problem then when two queries run at the same time, it takes longer to complete then if run in sequence |
| Date: | 2008-07-23 19:30:48 |
| Message-ID: | 20080723193048.GB3580@alvh.no-ip.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Miernik wrote:
> I have a PostgreSQL database on a very low-resource Xen virtual machine,
> 48 MB RAM. When two queries run at the same time, it takes longer to
> complete then if run in sequence. Is there perhaps a way to install
> something like a query sequencer, which would process queries in a FIFO
> manner, one at a time, even if a new query comes before the last one
> running is finished, it would not give the new query to the server
> before the one running now finishes? That would greatly improve
> performance.
One idea I just had was to have a connection pooler (say pgpool) and
allow only one connection slot. If the pooler is capable to be
configured to block new connections until the slot is unused, this would
do what you want. (I don't know whether poolers allow you to do this).
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeffrey Baker | 2008-07-23 19:57:34 | Re: Samsung 32GB SATA SSD tested |
| Previous Message | Scott Marlowe | 2008-07-23 17:25:35 | Re: how to fix problem then when two queries run at the same time, it takes longer to complete then if run in sequence |