I picked 260 because 256 are the max clients in the apache configuration
file.
My problem is that every apache request need to make a connection to the
database, so if I have all the 256 apache processes working, I need at
least 256 pg_pool processes.
However, with the pg_pgpool installed in each machine with 260 preforked
clients, the test ended quite well. The postgresql server didn't loaded
two much and errors like "There is already a transaction in progress"
disappeared (I think that was a problem with the apache persistent
connections).
I encountered also other problems that I must to check. I think they are
caused by my application.
As soon as I have some results, I'll let you know.
Thank you,
Denis
Jeff Trout wrote:
On Jul 27, 2005, at 10:46 AM, denis@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
I'm now testing with pg_pool installed on each apache frontend with
260 pg_pool preforked clients in each machine.
Why did you pick 260?
You don't need a 1:1 ratio. That is the point of the pool. Those
connections are "shared". Chances are extremely high that all your
apache clients are not issuing queries at the same exact time so your
queries end up getting funnelled into those X connections.
I ran with 32 kids on pg_pool and 350 apache processes. never had a
problem.
--
Jeff Trout <jeff@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
http://www.jefftrout.com/
http://www.stuarthamm.net/
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
