On 9/07/2010 3:20 AM, Harpreet singh Wadhwa wrote:
Hi,
I want to fine tune my postgresql to increase number of connects it
can handle in a minutes time.
Decrease the response time per request etc.
The exact case will be to handle around 100 concurrent requests.
If you're not using a connection pool, start using one.
Do you really need 100 *active* working query threads at one time?
Because if you do, you're going to need a scary-big disk subsystem and a
lot of processors.
Most people actually only need a few queries executing simultaneously,
they just need lots of connections to the database open concurrently
and/or lots of queries queued up for processing. For that purpose, a
connection pool is ideal.
You will get BETTER performance from postgresql with FEWER connections
to the "real" database that're all doing active work. If you need lots
and lots of connections you should use a connection pool to save the
main database the overhead of managing that.
--
Craig Ringer
--
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
