From: Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com>
To: Jignesh K. Shah <J.K.Shah@Sun.COM>
Cc: Postgresql Performance <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: ProcArrayLock (The Saga continues)
Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 01:19:11 +0100
Message-ID: <87hccgy77k.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <483F294A.9040108@sun.com>
References: <483F294A.9040108@sun.com>
"Jignesh K. Shah" <J.K.Shah@Sun.COM> writes:
> Note with this no think time concept, each clients can be about 75% CPU busy
> from what I observed. running it I found the clients scaling up saturates at
> about 60 now (compared to 500 from the original test). The peak throughput was
> at about 50 users (using synchrnous_commit=off)
So to get the maximum throughput on the benchmark with think times you want to
aggregate the clients about 10:1 with a connection pooler or some middleware
layer of some kind, it seems.
It's still interesting to find the choke points for large numbers of
connections. But I think not because it's limiting your benchmark results --
that would be better addressed by using fewer connections -- just for the sake
of knowing where problems loom on the horizon.
--
Gregory Stark
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
Ask me about EnterpriseDB's PostGIS support!
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: stark@enterprisedb.com, J.K.Shah@Sun.COM
Subject: Re: ProcArrayLock (The Saga continues)
In-Reply-To: <87hccgy77k.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox