Received: from localhost (maia-3.hub.org [200.46.204.184])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1476F9FB2F6
	for <pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@postgresql.org>;
	Thu,  1 Mar 2007 03:07:29 -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 58306-02 for
	<pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@postgresql.org>;
	Thu,  1 Mar 2007 03:06:59 -0400 (AST)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.4
Received: from smtp4.clear.net.nz (smtp4.clear.net.nz [203.97.37.64])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37E919FA495
	for <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>;
	Thu,  1 Mar 2007 03:07:22 -0400 (AST)
Received: from [192.168.1.11]
	(121-72-74-208.dsl.telstraclear.net [121.72.74.208])
	by smtp4.clear.net.nz (CLEAR Net Mail)
	with ESMTP id <0JE70090YQG82Z00@smtp4.clear.net.nz> for
	pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Thu, 01 Mar 2007 20:07:21 +1300 (NZDT)
Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2007 20:07:06 +1300
From: Mark Kirkwood <markir@paradise.net.nz>
Subject: Re: increasing database connections
In-reply-to: <45E6702A.5060602@commandprompt.com>
To: "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>
Cc: "Jonah H. Harris" <jonah.harris@gmail.com>,
	Shiva Sarna <shivasarna@yahoo.co.in>, pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Message-id: <45E67B9A.8030209@paradise.net.nz>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
References: <20070301051859.65918.qmail@web7714.mail.in.yahoo.com>
	<36e682920702282149y3529b175ob5814e3f957aec15@mail.gmail.com>
	<45E6702A.5060602@commandprompt.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.9 (X11/20061227)
X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.061 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=AWL, BAYES_40
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Archive-Number: 200703/4
X-Sequence-Number: 23409

Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Jonah H. Harris wrote:
>> On 3/1/07, Shiva Sarna <shivasarna@yahoo.co.in> 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.


Yeah - I thought that somewhere closer to 10000 connections is where you 
get hit with socket management related performance issues.

Cheers

Mark