Received: from maia.hub.org (unknown [200.46.204.183]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB701633E95 for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 15:38:19 -0400 (AST) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 32208-02 for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 19:38:08 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-ew0-f216.google.com (mail-ew0-f216.google.com [209.85.219.216]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C468C634D0D for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 15:30:27 -0400 (AST) Received: by ewy8 with SMTP id 8so22668687ewy.35 for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 11:30:25 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=S1d9VQpX+FUfBW+OElItvuJSSOVMm5TJLkjmKj/zLR4=; b=CmV5+5gNoxCmQscnGIGgGmwEhGAmL/zUCz2bxbYv7wXBnCVCNz+87OPBfJd3cqQu1U 5dzPbdzagvbbWJGmCIXlDZyGGHTuHQ7EnXZO0Yqk2lMEc9QKEROf1MuGW9vCocekLc7G hHZykMboc3RhjgChr6C+uuwvrWthkDq27ZOwQ= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=kkOnIMfbjOPyPOX267LoxK5vzrDfmwb3uPBEnlQnEWnUd4XQY0v7tgnTNL3nMwRxDX 3e2S2tlCwhUNLTc8OR58BA0ebiQI7OF/VDyzv05dyoGIEv61XPXeCxqSQK8hKH/HaoO6 f2wbXFyVZ1380ApSC3/76fR4pBi77GqwoB+qs= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.216.85.147 with SMTP id u19mr2481335wee.88.1263238220383; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 11:30:20 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <61039b861001110954j67bd0efex500a91e7c2b0fd74@mail.gmail.com> References: <61039b861001110544o2c352763q13dcf9d78a156714@mail.gmail.com> <61039b861001110842g15bb1f26jc50b6e6762e01427@mail.gmail.com> <4B4B08E1020000250002E185@gw.wicourts.gov> <61039b861001110954j67bd0efex500a91e7c2b0fd74@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2010 12:30:20 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: performance config help From: Scott Marlowe To: Bob Dusek Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.589 tagged_above=-10 required=5 tests=BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_DATE_PAST_20XX=3.188 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 201001/208 X-Sequence-Number: 37088 On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 10:54 AM, Bob Dusek wrote: >> You want to use some connection pooling which queues requests when >> more than some configurable number of connections is already active >> with a request. =A0You probably want to run that on the server side. >> As for the postgresql.conf, could you show what you have right now, >> excluding all comments? > > The problem with connection pooling is that we actually have to achieve m= ore > than 40 per second, which happens to be the sweet spot with our current > config. Number of parallel processes doesn't equal # reqs/second. If your maximum throughput occurs at 40 parallel requests, you'll get more done reducing the maximum number of concurrent processes to 40 and letting them stack up in a queue waiting for a spot to run.