Received: from localhost (maia-3.hub.org [200.46.204.184]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D67DB9FB40E for ; Thu, 1 Mar 2007 02:17:50 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.184]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 51475-03 for ; Thu, 1 Mar 2007 02:17:24 -0400 (AST) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.4 Received: from lists.commandprompt.com (host-254.commandprompt.net [207.173.203.254]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 587AB9FB5BE for ; Thu, 1 Mar 2007 02:17:46 -0400 (AST) Received: from [192.168.1.50] (or-67-76-146-141.sta.embarqhsd.net [67.76.146.141]) (authenticated bits=0) by lists.commandprompt.com (8.13.7/8.13.6) with ESMTP id l216HoOZ007225 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 28 Feb 2007 22:17:50 -0800 Message-ID: <45E6702A.5060602@commandprompt.com> Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 22:18:18 -0800 From: "Joshua D. Drake" Organization: Command Prompt, Inc. User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.9 (X11/20070103) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Jonah H. Harris" CC: Shiva Sarna , pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: increasing database connections References: <20070301051859.65918.qmail@web7714.mail.in.yahoo.com> <36e682920702282149y3529b175ob5814e3f957aec15@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <36e682920702282149y3529b175ob5814e3f957aec15@mail.gmail.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.94.0.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV version 0.88.5, clamav-milter version 0.88.5 on projects.commandprompt.com X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Greylist: Sender succeded SMTP AUTH authentication, not delayed by milter-greylist-1.6 (lists.commandprompt.com [192.168.2.159]); Wed, 28 Feb 2007 22:17:51 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.06 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=AWL, BAYES_50, FORGED_RCVD_HELO X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200703/3 X-Sequence-Number: 23408 Jonah H. Harris wrote: > On 3/1/07, Shiva Sarna wrote: >> I am sorry if it is a repeat question but I want to know if database >> performance will decrease if I increase the max-connections to 2000. At >> present it is 100. > > Most certainly. Adding connections over 200 will degrade performance > dramatically. You should look into pgpool or connection pooling from > the application. huh? That is certainly not my experience. I have systems that show no depreciable performance hit on even 1000+ connections. To be fair to the discussion, these are on systems with 4+ cores. Usually 8+ and significant ram 16/32 gig fo ram. Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake > -- === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. === Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240 Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997 http://www.commandprompt.com/ Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/