| From: | Jeffery Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Raj <rajeshkumar(dot)dba09(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Pgsql-admin <pgsql-admin(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: TPS in direct Postgres Vs TPS in pgbouncer |
| Date: | 2026-06-21 19:19:14 |
| Message-ID: | CAMkU=1xvG99AY7-SiOjppHVZXGdFYzRHOD1GFeSV_mBj84t53w@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin |
On Sun, Jun 21, 2026 at 9:24 AM Raj <rajeshkumar(dot)dba09(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> When the application team is using posytgres directly for 17.9 version,
> they get necessary TPS.
>
> When they use pgbouncer, they get 50% reduction in TPS.
>
> What are general advices?
>
What is the transaction being used? If it is something very simple, like
pgbench's built-in -S, then I think this is expected. Injecting pgbouncer
doubles the amount of network/IPC thrashing needed. If you have a meaty
transaction, this might not matter but on a very light transaction you
might be doubling something which is already counting for 90% of the time.
Cheers,
Jeff
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | ek ek | 2026-06-23 07:55:22 | About asynchronous I/O |
| Previous Message | Jorge Batista | 2026-06-21 14:37:06 | RE: TPS in direct Postgres Vs TPS in pgbouncer |