Re: Any better plan for this query?..
От | Joshua D. Drake |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Any better plan for this query?.. |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1242144479.20358.5.camel@jd-laptop.pragmaticzealot.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Any better plan for this query?.. (Dimitri <dimitrik.fr@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Any better plan for this query?..
|
Список | pgsql-performance |
On Tue, 2009-05-12 at 17:22 +0200, Dimitri wrote: > Robert, what I'm testing now is 256 users max. The workload is growing > progressively from 1, 2, 4, 8 ... to 256 users. Of course the Max > throughput is reached on the number of users equal to 2 * number of > cores, but what's important for me here - database should continue to > keep the workload! - response time regressing, but the troughput > should remain near the same. > > So, do I really need a pooler to keep 256 users working?? - I don't > think so, but please, correct me. If they disconnect and reconnect yes. If they keep the connections live then no. Joshua D. Drake -- PostgreSQL - XMPP: jdrake@jabber.postgresql.org Consulting, Development, Support, Training 503-667-4564 - http://www.commandprompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company, serving since 1997
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: