| From: | "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Jorge Augusto Meira" <jmeira(at)c3sl(dot)ufpr(dot)br>, "Euler Taveira de Oliveira" <euler(at)timbira(dot)com> |
| Cc: | <pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Problems with max_connections parameter |
| Date: | 2010-12-03 14:54:07 |
| Message-ID: | 4CF8B02F020000250003821A@gw.wicourts.gov |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
Euler Taveira de Oliveira <euler(at)timbira(dot)com> wrote:
> Talking about your problem, are you sure you're not reaching
> max_connections?
It also strikes me that from the minimal information given, it might
be possible that pid numbers or port numbers are wrapping around
before the OS is ready to allow re-use. I haven't seen that
behavior except in machines infected with a worm, but this test
might be edging into the same territory if it's using a new
connection for each request. Obviously, nobody who cared about
performance would use that technique in production, but it rather
sounds like this test does.
-Kevin
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2010-12-03 15:53:15 | Re: |
| Previous Message | Euler Taveira de Oliveira | 2010-12-03 14:41:28 | Re: Problems with max_connections parameter |