Re: pgbouncer - massive overhead?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 06/19/2012 09:00 AM, Strange, John W wrote:
Given a baseline postgresql.conf config and a couple DL580 40 core/256GB memory I noticed a large over head for pgbouncer, has  anyone seen this before?


$ pgbench -h `hostname -i` -j 32 -p 4320 -U asgprod -s 500 -c 32 -S -T 60 pgbench_500
Scale option ignored, using pgbench_branches table count = 500
starting vacuum...end.
transaction type: SELECT only
scaling factor: 500
query mode: simple
number of clients: 32
number of threads: 32
duration: 60 s
number of transactions actually processed: 1743073
tps = 29049.886666 (including connections establishing)
tps = 29050.308194 (excluding connections establishing)

$ pgbench -h `hostname -i` -j 32 -p 4310 -U asgprod -s 500 -c 32 -S -T 60 pgbench_500
Scale option ignored, using pgbench_branches table count = 500
starting vacuum...end.
transaction type: SELECT only
scaling factor: 500
query mode: simple
number of clients: 32
number of threads: 32
duration: 60 s
number of transactions actually processed: 8692204
tps = 144857.505107 (including connections establishing)
tps = 144880.181341 (excluding connections establishing)

processor       : 39
vendor_id       : GenuineIntel
cpu family      : 6
model           : 47
model name      :        Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E7- 4860  @ 2.27GHz


I'm very dubious that the stats are meaningful as run. Were the above stats generated on consecutive runs on the same machine or was the test database fully returned to baseline between runs and the machine restarted to clear cache?

I doubt anyone here would trust the results of a 60-second pgbench run - especially a select-only test on a server that will likely end up with virtually everything ultimately in cache. Make sure each run is started from the same state and run for 30-60 minutes.

Still, you *are* adding a layer between the client and the server. Running the simplest of read-only queries against a fully-cached database on a fast many-core machine is likely to emphasize any latency introduced by pgbouncer. But it's also not a use-case for which pgbouncer is intended. If you were to add -C so each query required a new client connection a different picture would emerge. Same thing if you had 2000 client connections of which only a handful were running queries at any moment.

Cheers,
Steve


--
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance


[Postgresql General]     [Postgresql PHP]     [PHP Users]     [PHP Home]     [PHP on Windows]     [Kernel Newbies]     [PHP Classes]     [PHP Books]     [PHP Databases]     [Yosemite]

  Powered by Linux