Received: from maia.hub.org (maia-5.hub.org [200.46.204.29])
	by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2AD50633102
	for <pgsql-admin-postgresql.org@mail.postgresql.org>;
	Mon, 23 Aug 2010 11:38:24 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86])
	by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.29]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 44923-07 for
	<pgsql-admin-postgresql.org@mail.postgresql.org>;
	Mon, 23 Aug 2010 14:38:16 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from bay0-omc1-s28.bay0.hotmail.com (bay0-omc1-s28.bay0.hotmail.com
	[65.54.190.39])
	by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB3BD633032
	for <pgsql-admin@postgresql.org>; Mon, 23 Aug 2010 11:38:16 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from BAY149-W45 ([65.54.190.61]) by bay0-omc1-s28.bay0.hotmail.com
	with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675);
	Mon, 23 Aug 2010 07:38:14 -0700
Message-ID: <BAY149-w45AD2D7EB1BFEF71621197AE820@phx.gbl>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="_d16c902b-344d-418a-a65c-5be5b6b1d768_"
X-Originating-IP: [91.206.0.43]
From: Kieren Scott <kierenscott@hotmail.com>
To: <pgsql-admin@postgresql.org>
Subject: pgBouncer for connection pooling
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2010 14:38:14 +0000
Importance: Normal
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 23 Aug 2010 14:38:14.0468 (UTC)
	FILETIME=[D1713840:01CB42D0]
X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.909 tagged_above=-10 required=5
	tests=BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001,
	T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Archive-Number: 201008/148
X-Sequence-Number: 35397

--_d16c902b-344d-418a-a65c-5be5b6b1d768_
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


Hi=2C

I have a web-based application (drupal) which uses PHP to make connections =
to a back-end postgresql 8.3 server. The application and database are on se=
parate servers=2C but as we can get 20+ concurrent connections on the datab=
ase I've looked at pgBouncer to try and reduce the overhead of new connecti=
ons on the database. I currently have pgBouncer running on the same server =
as my postgres database but I was wondering whether this is a recommended s=
etup - are the performance benefits of using a connection pooler overshadow=
ed by the overhead of running pgBouncer on the same server as the database?

How are other people using pgBouncer? E.g. on a separate server from the da=
tabase etc...?

Thanks in advance.
 		 	   		  =

--_d16c902b-344d-418a-a65c-5be5b6b1d768_
Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<html>
<head>
<style><!--
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px=3B
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
font-size: 10pt=3B
font-family:Tahoma
}
--></style>
</head>
<body class=3D'hmmessage'>
Hi=2C<br><br>I have a web-based application (drupal) which uses PHP to make=
 connections to a back-end postgresql 8.3 server. The application and datab=
ase are on separate servers=2C but as we can get 20+ concurrent connections=
 on the database I've looked at pgBouncer to try and reduce the overhead of=
 new connections on the database. I currently have pgBouncer running on the=
 same server as my postgres database but I was wondering whether this is a =
recommended setup - are the performance benefits of using a connection pool=
er overshadowed by the overhead of running pgBouncer on the same server as =
the database?<br><br>How are other people using pgBouncer? E.g. on a separa=
te server from the database etc...?<br><br>Thanks in advance.<br> 		 	   		=
  </body>
</html>=

--_d16c902b-344d-418a-a65c-5be5b6b1d768_--