Matt Clark wrote:

Apache::DBI overall works better to what I require, even if it is not a pool per sey. Now if pgpool supported variable rate pooling like Apache does with it's children, it might help to even things out. That and you'd still get the spike if you have to start the webserver and database server at or around the same time.

I still don't quite get it though - you shouldn't be getting more than one
child per second being launched by Apache, so that's only one PG postmaster
per second, which is really a trivial load.  That is unless you have
'StartServers' set high, in which case the 'obvious' answer is to lower it.
Are you launching multiple DB connections per Apache process as well?

I have start servers set to a fairly high limit. However this would make little different overall if I restarted the webservers to load in new modules during a high load time. When I am averaging 145 concurrent connections before a restart, I can expect that many request to hit the server once Apache begins to respond.

As a result, it will literally cause a spike on both machines as new connections are initiated at a high rate. In my case I don't always have the luxury of waiting till 0300 just to test a change.

Again, not necessarily looking for a PostgreSQL solution. I am looking for a method that would allow the database or the OS itself to protect the system it's hosted on. If both the database and the apache server were on the same machine this type of scenario would be unstable to say the least.

        Martin Foster
        Creator/Designer Ethereal Realms

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
     subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
     message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

Reply via email to