Large number of short lived connections - could a connection pool help?
От | Cody Caughlan |
---|---|
Тема | Large number of short lived connections - could a connection pool help? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAPVp=gYKyQxy2D_3npH0WB313DPTGVao+BifXKKq_Mc7jA07bg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответы |
Re: Large number of short lived connections - could a connection pool help?
Re: Large number of short lived connections - could a connection pool help? |
Список | pgsql-performance |
We have anywhere from 60-80 background worker processes connecting to Postgres, performing a short task and then disconnecting. The lifetime of these tasks averages 1-3 seconds. I know that there is some connection overhead to Postgres, but I dont know what would be the best way to measure this overheard and/or to determine if its currently an issue at all. If there is a substantial overheard I would think that employing a connection pool like pgbouncer to keep a static list of these connections and then dole them out to the transient workers on demand. So the overall cumulative number of connections wouldnt change, I would just attempt to alleviate the setup/teardown of them so quickly. Is this something that I should look into or is it not much of an issue? Whats the best way to determine if I could benefit from using a connection pool? Thanks.
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: