Re: max_connections proposal

From: Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Craig Ringer <craig(at)postnewspapers(dot)com(dot)au>, "List, Postgres" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: max_connections proposal
Date: 2011-05-30 00:46:16
Message-ID: BANLkTim4DWdgEB_cdet-OfHiHj45Eojf6Q@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 5:30 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
> OK, maybe word it as "If you're considering raising max_connections much
> above 100, ..." ?

I think it can be even shorter and to the point:

If you're considering raising max_connections consider pooling instead.

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jaime Casanova 2011-05-30 01:26:54 Re: How to check a table content efficiently? With LIMIT and OFFSET?
Previous Message Edison So 2011-05-30 00:19:55 Re: max_connections proposal