Re: pgbench unable to scale beyond 100 concurrent connections

From: Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Sachin Kotwal <kotsachin(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pgbench unable to scale beyond 100 concurrent connections
Date: 2016-06-29 15:48:53
Message-ID: CAMkU=1ycvVFFSyQO6x=kn+7umbxBh1vJZUdPvhNOsWGQu1WErg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 5:36 AM, Sachin Kotwal <kotsachin(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Hi Fabien,
>
> Sorry for very short report.
> I feel pgbench is not so complex tool.
>
> Please see below answers to your questions.
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 5:07 PM, Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Hello Sachin,
>>
>> Your report is very imprecise so it is hard to tell anything.
>>
>> What version of client and server are you running?
>
> I am testing it with 9.6-beta1 binaries. For server and client it is same.
> I am using pgbench on top of postgres_fdw.

That seems like a pretty important bit of info, there.

..

> postgresql does not give any error.

Surely it does. Perhaps you are not looking in the correct log file.

>
> pgbench says:
> client 36 aborted in state 2: ERROR: could not connect to server "server_1"
> DETAIL: FATAL: sorry, too many clients already

The error is probably coming from the remote side of the FDW, and then
getting passed from there to the direct server, and from there to
pgbench.

Cheers,

Jeff

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2016-06-29 15:49:49 Re: bug in citext's upgrade script for parallel aggregates
Previous Message Robert Haas 2016-06-29 15:30:43 Re: Protocol buffer support for Postgres