Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1U52oe-00045e-9U for pgsql-performance@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 23:29:40 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with smtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1U52od-0007Nr-Qc for pgsql-performance@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 23:29:39 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1U52od-0007Nm-22 for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 23:29:39 +0000 Received: from mail-ve0-f172.google.com ([209.85.128.172]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1U52oZ-0000Bi-Uo for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 23:29:38 +0000 Received: by mail-ve0-f172.google.com with SMTP id cz11so5660030veb.17 for ; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 15:29:35 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:date:from:to:message-id:in-reply-to:references:subject :x-mailer:mime-version:content-type; bh=JN5mppviMFrdm5cEbxO9woJFIQ2gkNn98dQvRR7W8Yo=; b=WFBpoGQrhpSsBc6x253e1QEqyI/h7uoOQpcjWtdviZCJwkGZaHTraxg55ehOjmaBXJ gqdheh5srF/Iuu+TJJDbmzsoT7r3sqO+VVC5eifxF/bP+Nyn0Et2TGPQDkrZN3XgmrFj nlDqLN4bdqMR/ur/MjtnR9CJAeqsmRXeOhnAIHapBbfhohPbsJPCmys3Dw+i6TYWbYeE FF4Gpv4FNrmh/bi95JuhN0MS2Xq+UXGgoKqqArm8xd9dCEIOgMvLA6Rtko5t6WYnKAKm t0sSg/3NbjYzflDq9X8upd+fwW8Psl3oOs/+2RcAaV0oKKGDeCL17N3zWeyBghOWQwAn dE2g== X-Received: by 10.58.219.6 with SMTP id pk6mr21235691vec.41.1360625374923; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 15:29:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.150.104] (cpe-142-105-213-24.stny.res.rr.com. [142.105.213.24]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id yu4sm61453870veb.7.2013.02.11.15.29.33 (version=TLSv1 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 11 Feb 2013 15:29:34 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 18:29:32 -0500 From: Will Platnick To: "=?utf-8?Q?pgsql-performance=40postgresql.org?=" Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: <13A05E96-01A0-4B0A-8EA3-2A3B7FDF6838@hsk.hk> <1360154987.89420.YahooMailNeo@web162901.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <1360185170.99635.YahooMailNeo@web162903.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Subject: Re: postgresql.conf recommendations X-Mailer: sparrow 1.6.4 (build 1178) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="51197edc_836c40e_82cc" X-Pg-Spam-Score: -2.7 (--) List-Archive: List-Help: List-ID: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Mailing-List: pgsql-performance Precedence: bulk Sender: pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org --51197edc_836c40e_82cc Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline > We will probably tweak this knob some more -- i.e., what is the sweet spot between 1 and 100? Would it be higher than 50 but less than 100? Or is it somewhere lower than 50? > > I would love to know the answer to this as well. We have a similar situation, pgbouncer with transaction log pooling with 140 connections. What is the the right value to size pgbouncer connections to? Is there a formula that takes the # of cores into account? --51197edc_836c40e_82cc Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline
=
We will probably tweak this knob some more -- i.e., w= hat is the sweet spot between 1 and 100=3F Would it be higher than 50 but= less than 100=3F Or is it somewhere lower than 50=3F
I would love to know the answer to this as well. We have = a similar situation, pgbouncer with transaction log pooling with 140 conn= ections.  What is the the right value to size pgbouncer connections = to=3F Is there a formula that takes the =23 of cores into account=3F --51197edc_836c40e_82cc--