| From: | Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at> |
|---|---|
| To: | Raj <rajeshkumar(dot)dba09(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pgsql-admin <pgsql-admin(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Pgbouncer |
| Date: | 2026-05-14 21:35:46 |
| Message-ID: | 27d9f616f9b94cef2932348b15c0ad80cb4c09c5.camel@cybertec.at |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin |
On Thu, 2026-05-14 at 17:49 +0530, Raj wrote:
> App team using connection pooling and opening 500 sessions which seems to me stay ,
>
> In this case pgbouncer session pooling or transaction pooling which is better?
Transaction pooling.
> Max_connections in db: 1000
>
> Pool_mode=session
> Max connections in pgbouncer: 3000
> Default_pool_size=500
> Reserve_pool_size=100
> Min_pool_size=20
Too big. Set default_pool_size = min_pool_size = 20, and set reserve_pool_size = 0.
If that turns out to be too small, increase slightly.
Yours,
Laurenz Albe
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Ron Johnson | 2026-05-15 01:03:47 | Re: Are these metadata ALTER TABLE commands transactionally safe? |
| Previous Message | David G. Johnston | 2026-05-14 21:26:05 | Re: Are these metadata ALTER TABLE commands transactionally safe? |