Le 02/07/2010 15:46, Geoffrey a écrit : > Tatsuo Ishii wrote: >>> I'm trying to get a handle on sane values for these two parameters. >>> I assume that they should somehow correlate to my existing >>> max_connections in my postgresql.conf file. Anyone using pgpool-II >>> care to comment? >>> >>> I'm sure it's a balancing act between how many connections you want >>> verses how many cached connections you have, but not sure how to >>> properly assess this issue. >>> >>> (I've tried posting to the pgpool list, but it's apparently >>> unavailable at this time) >> >> Here is an recommended rule: >> >> max_pool*num_init_children <= (max_connections - >> superuser_reserved_connections) >> >> Because num_init_children defines the max concurrent connections >> pgpool-II can accept, you might want to keep num_init_children as >> large as possible. In this case you could lower max_pool to as low as >> 1, which may cause performance degration because of low effect of >> connection cache if you would have more than 1 user/database >> combinations. However lower max_pool will not any error or any >> problems except performance. > > We have a complicated set up. We have 13 databases with 12 postmasters. > So that means 2 databases share a postmaster, the rest have their > own. Consequently, separate pools for each postmaster. We will > frequently have 20-30 or more users connecting to any one database, > although some databases are much lower. This is further complicated by > a web application that also connects to the databases. > You won't be able to handle more than one postmaster with one pgPool-II in pooling mode. You'll need at least one pgPool-II for each postmaster. And so, do one configuration for each pgPool-II. -- Guillaume http://www.postgresql.fr http://dalibo.com -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
