Pgbouncer worked fine for this. Thanks.
On Wed, Jun 8, 2016 at 1:12 PM, Sameer Kumar
wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 9 Jun 2016, 12:50 a.m. Michael McInness,
> wrote:
>
>> I am working with a system that uses JDBC and JNDI-based connection
>> pooling. There are currently many organizations that use the sy
On Thu, 9 Jun 2016, 12:50 a.m. Michael McInness,
wrote:
> I am working with a system that uses JDBC and JNDI-based connection
> pooling. There are currently many organizations that use the system. Each
> of the organizations has multiple, individual system users.
>
> Currently, each entity has it
I am working with a system that uses JDBC and JNDI-based connection
pooling. There are currently many organizations that use the system. Each
of the organizations has multiple, individual system users.
Currently, each entity has its own database and a corresponding
application-based datasource and
On 10/31/2013 3:24 PM, John R Pierce wrote:
On 10/31/2013 1:09 PM, andy wrote:
I'm not sure if geoserver is like openLayers/mapserver, but in the
later case (which I use), you can set it up to have the browser
(running openLayers) request multiple layers at the same time... and
on top of that ea
On 10/31/2013 1:09 PM, andy wrote:
I'm not sure if geoserver is like openLayers/mapserver, but in the
later case (which I use), you can set it up to have the browser
(running openLayers) request multiple layers at the same time... and
on top of that each layer can be requested in tiles. (That
On 10/31/2013 11:15 AM, John R Pierce wrote:
On 10/31/2013 5:34 AM, si24 wrote:
It seems for each person that they seem to get about +-20 or more
connections each depending on there use of the map if they add the layers
that are overlyed over the map like zones etc...
that sounds really broken
On 10/31/2013 5:34 AM, si24 wrote:
It seems for each person that they seem to get about +-20 or more
connections each depending on there use of the map if they add the layers
that are overlyed over the map like zones etc...
that sounds really broken.
--
john r pierce
for some reason it not always pooling the connections for reuse so I'm not
sure what or if I have left something out.
As I only have a 100 postgres connections and when you have six people
working on it at the same time the connections neary go all the way. Which
in turn starts making pink tiles f
On 01/11/13 00:10, Rémi Cura wrote:
Hey,
I might be completly wrong, but when you say
"get the connections to close if they are not being used",
I'd say that it is a bad client design to not close a connection when
it doesn't need it anymore.
The client should retrieve the data or close when n
Hey,
I might be completly wrong, but when you say
"get the connections to close if they are not being used",
I'd say that it is a bad client design to not close a connection when it
doesn't need it anymore.
The client should retrieve the data or close when not using after a certain
amount of time
I'm not 100% sure I follow in that part of if its the client cause currently
when I run it on my own computer it does the same thing. Only when I stop
tomcat and start it again then i get the 3 default connection that postgres
has set up. our server does the same thing.
--
View this message in
currently my pg bouncer.ini looks like this :
[databases]
manifold = host=localhost port=5432 dbname=manifold user=postgrest
password=123ert
[pgbouncer]
logfile = C:\Program Files\PostgreSQL\log\pgbouncer.log
pidfile = C:\Program Files\PostgreSQL\log\pgbouncer.pid
listen_addr = *
listen_port = 6
Isn'it a client problem?
It should be client application closing connection when done with data
retrieval, and not the other way around?
Cheers,
Rémi-C
2013/10/31 Jayadevan
> I have never used pgbouncer myself. But my guess is you have to look at the
> Timeout parameters in the configuration
I have never used pgbouncer myself. But my guess is you have to look at the
Timeout parameters in the configuration file.
--
View this message in context:
http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/Connection-pooling-tp5776378p5776481.html
Sent from the PostgreSQL - general mailing list archive at
I have now installed the pgbouncer and it seemed to help a little but it did
not bring the connections back down once the connections ended or people
stopped using it. although it would fluctuate up and down on occasion but it
still reached 100 connections.
--
View this message in context:
http
On 31/10/13 03:13, si24 wrote:
I have geoserver connected to a postgres database and so far I have been
reading that I would need some sort of connection pooling but how do I go
about doing that when it seems most of the connection pooling
aplications/programs seem to only run on linux. I have a
On 10/30/2013 07:13 AM, si24 wrote:
I have geoserver connected to a postgres database and so far I have been
reading that I would need some sort of connection pooling but how do I go
about doing that when it seems most of the connection pooling
aplications/programs seem to only run on linux. I ha
> -Original Message-
> From: pgsql-general-ow...@postgresql.org [mailto:pgsql-general-
> ow...@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of si24
> Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2013 10:14 AM
> To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
> Subject: [GENERAL] Connection pooling
>
> I have
yes they are as well as the tomcat which is where geoserver is running from.
--
View this message in context:
http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/Connection-pooling-tp5776378p5776386.html
Sent from the PostgreSQL - general mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
--
Sent via pgsql-general mai
Are the geoserver and postgres on same computer?
Cheers,
Rémi-C
2013/10/30 si24
> I'm not sure if its suppose to be under general so please let me know if I
> need to move it to another topic area please.
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/Con
I'm not sure if its suppose to be under general so please let me know if I
need to move it to another topic area please.
--
View this message in context:
http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/Connection-pooling-tp5776378p5776382.html
Sent from the PostgreSQL - general mailing list archive at
I have geoserver connected to a postgres database and so far I have been
reading that I would need some sort of connection pooling but how do I go
about doing that when it seems most of the connection pooling
aplications/programs seem to only run on linux. I have a windows machine.
otherwise is th
On Fri, 2011-10-07 at 15:45 -0400, Brandon Phelps wrote:
> Forgive me, I'm still a bit confused by how max_pool works with
> num_init_children. First you said that at most I can have 32 clients sending
> queries, but then you said that each process can handle 4 different
> connections... so doe
Forgive me, I'm still a bit confused by how max_pool works with
num_init_children. First you said that at most I can have 32 clients sending
queries, but then you said that each process can handle 4 different
connections... so does this mean that I can have 128 connections from pgpool to
my p
On Fri, 2011-10-07 at 13:51 -0400, Brandon Phelps wrote:
> So we decided to go with pgpool-II. The documentation is a little lacking
> for pgpool-II so I have one question:
>
> How are connections handled once the default levels are reached? Here are my
> pgpool settings:
>
> num_init_childre
So we decided to go with pgpool-II. The documentation is a little lacking for
pgpool-II so I have one question:
How are connections handled once the default levels are reached? Here are my
pgpool settings:
num_init_children = 32
max_pool = 4
This creates 32 child processes when we start pgp
On 07/10/11 06:57, Brandon Phelps wrote:
Can anyone recommend a good solution for connection pooling? Here is our
setup:
2 PostgreSQL 9.1 servers (1 master, 1 hot standby).
1 Apache 2.2.17
We have a pretty extensive web application running on the apache server
that talks to both of the database
On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 3:57 PM, Brandon Phelps wrote:
> Can anyone recommend a good solution for connection pooling? Here is our
> setup:
>
> 2 PostgreSQL 9.1 servers (1 master, 1 hot standby).
> 1 Apache 2.2.17
>
> We have a pretty extensive web application running on the apache server
> that t
Can anyone recommend a good solution for connection pooling? Here is our setup:
2 PostgreSQL 9.1 servers (1 master, 1 hot standby).
1 Apache 2.2.17
We have a pretty extensive web application running on the apache server that
talks to both of the database servers. Updates and small tasks (simp
On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 1:09 PM, David Kerr wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 05, 2010 at 10:44:53PM -0400, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> - pgbouncer is totally transparent. I manage quite a few databases and
> - I use it (w/session mode) so I can psql to a single host (localhost),
> - and bounce between different d
On Mon, Apr 05, 2010 at 09:46:45PM -0600, Scott Marlowe wrote:
- On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 2:36 PM, David Kerr wrote:
- > My app will have over 10k concurrent users. I have huge servers 32 cores
(64bit), 64GB ram. RedHat linux.
- >
- > Those 10k users will all be logging in as one of 5 application u
On Mon, Apr 05, 2010 at 10:44:53PM -0400, Merlin Moncure wrote:
- On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 4:36 PM, David Kerr wrote:
- > On Sat, Apr 03, 2010 at 09:32:25PM -0400, Merlin Moncure wrote:
- > Based on a lot of the comments i've gotten here, I'm starting to think that
I've got the wrong idea about
- >
On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 2:36 PM, David Kerr wrote:
> My app will have over 10k concurrent users. I have huge servers 32 cores
> (64bit), 64GB ram. RedHat linux.
>
> Those 10k users will all be logging in as one of 5 application users.
You should probably also look into memcached to take a lot of
On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 4:36 PM, David Kerr wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 03, 2010 at 09:32:25PM -0400, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> -
> - I have a lot of respect for pgbouncer (haven't used pgpool). One
> - possible way to do what you're thinking is to rotate the pool on user.
> - In bouncer each database rol
On Sat, Apr 03, 2010 at 09:32:25PM -0400, Merlin Moncure wrote:
- On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 5:17 PM, David Kerr wrote:
- > Howdy all,
- >
- > I have some apps that are connecting to my DB via direct JDBC and I'd like
to pool their connections.
- >
- > I've been looking at poolers for a while, and p
We are using proxool for many deployments, we were using DBCP but proxool is
better in terms of features.
On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 10:34 AM, Wappler, Robert wrote:
> On 2010-03-29, David Kerr wrote:
>
> > On 3/27/2010 12:46 AM, John R Pierce wrote:
> >> Allan Kamau wrote:
> >>> You may also have a
On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 5:17 PM, David Kerr wrote:
> Howdy all,
>
> I have some apps that are connecting to my DB via direct JDBC and I'd like to
> pool their connections.
>
> I've been looking at poolers for a while, and pgbouncer and pgpool-ii seem to
> be some of the most popular, so
> i've s
Allan Kamau wrote:
You may also have a look at Commons DBCP from Apache software
foundation, "http://commons.apache.org/dbcp/";. I have used it for a
few projects and have had no problems.
John R Pierce wrote:
for that matter, JDBC has its own connection pooling in java.
David Kerr wrote:
It
On 2010-03-29, David Kerr wrote:
> On 3/27/2010 12:46 AM, John R Pierce wrote:
>> Allan Kamau wrote:
>>> You may also have a look at Commons DBCP from Apache software
>>> foundation, "http://commons.apache.org/dbcp/";. I have used it for a
>>> few projects and have had no problems.
>>
>> for tha
On 3/27/2010 12:46 AM, John R Pierce wrote:
Allan Kamau wrote:
You may also have a look at Commons DBCP from Apache software
foundation, "http://commons.apache.org/dbcp/";. I have used it for a
few projects and have had no problems.
for that matter, JDBC has its own connection pooling in java.
Allan Kamau wrote:
You may also have a look at Commons DBCP from Apache software
foundation, "http://commons.apache.org/dbcp/";. I have used it for a
few projects and have had no problems.
for that matter, JDBC has its own connection pooling in java.
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list
On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 11:17 PM, David Kerr wrote:
> Howdy all,
>
> I have some apps that are connecting to my DB via direct JDBC and I'd like to
> pool their connections.
>
> I've been looking at poolers for a while, and pgbouncer and pgpool-ii seem to
> be some of the most popular, so
> i've
Howdy all,
I have some apps that are connecting to my DB via direct JDBC and I'd like to
pool their connections.
I've been looking at poolers for a while, and pgbouncer and pgpool-ii seem to
be some of the most popular, so
i've started with those.
I'm setting up pgbouncer, and i've hit a bit
On Sat, 08 Sep 2007 19:28:52 +0400, Scott Marlowe
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 9/7/07, Max Zorloff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Fri, 07 Sep 2007 10:58:36 +0400, Marko Kreen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>> The pgpool (I tried 3.1, 3.4 and pgpool-II 1.2) works fine but has
the
>> followin
On 9/7/07, Max Zorloff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 07 Sep 2007 10:58:36 +0400, Marko Kreen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >> The pgpool (I tried 3.1, 3.4 and pgpool-II 1.2) works fine but has the
> >> following problem - after some time it
> >> just "hangs", and if I try to connect to it w
2007/9/8, Denis Gasparin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > This has certainly been discussed before.
> >
> > IIRC the real argument against that was, that fork() isn't the most
> > expensive thing to do anymore. And Postgres does lots of other stuff
> > after accept(), namely connecting to a certain datab
> This has certainly been discussed before.
>
> IIRC the real argument against that was, that fork() isn't the most
> expensive thing to do anymore. And Postgres does lots of other stuff
> after accept(), namely connecting to a certain database,
> authenticating the user, etc..
Ok. I knew that. I
Hi,
Denis Gasparin wrote:
Why not to implement a connection pooling server side as apache for
example does?
This has certainly been discussed before.
IIRC the real argument against that was, that fork() isn't the most
expensive thing to do anymore. And Postgres does lots of other stuff
afte
You'll want to evaluate pgBouncer to see if it meets your needs. It
works very well for general proxying, connection pooling.
On 9/7/07, Denis Gasparin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm looking for connection pooling solutions for our php/apache server.
>
> I already checked pgpool and pgbouncer b
On 07.09.2007 10:16, Denis Gasparin wrote:
What to do you think about this?
I think there is no need for this and it's the wrong place to implement it.
Why should PostgreSQL do something to work around broken application
design? An application that closes its database connection just to
crea
On 9/7/07, Max Zorloff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 07 Sep 2007 10:58:36 +0400, Marko Kreen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> The pgpool (I tried 3.1, 3.4 and pgpool-II 1.2) works fine but has the
> >> following problem - after some time it
> >> just "hangs", and if I try to connect to it wit
On Fri, 07 Sep 2007 10:58:36 +0400, Marko Kreen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The pgpool (I tried 3.1, 3.4 and pgpool-II 1.2) works fine but has the
following problem - after some time it
just "hangs", and if I try to connect to it with psql it just hangs
indefinitely. After restart
it works fine a
I'm looking for connection pooling solutions for our php/apache server.
I already checked pgpool and pgbouncer but during the tests, I had the
following (mad) idea...
Why not to implement a connection pooling server side as apache for
example does?
I try to explain my idea...
The postgres serve
On 9/6/07, Max Zorloff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello. I'm using Apache + PHP + Postgres for my project. I've tried the
> two poolers people
> usually recommend here - pgbouncer and pgpool.
>
> I have a problem with pgbouncer - under the load the query execution
> becomes ~10 times slower
> tha
Hello. I'm using Apache + PHP + Postgres for my project. I've tried the
two poolers people
usually recommend here - pgbouncer and pgpool.
I have a problem with pgbouncer - under the load the query execution
becomes ~10 times slower
than it should be - basically to test it, I connect with psql
Is there any inbuilt facility in postgres for connection pooling .. ??
Not built in, but...
http://pgpool.projects.postgresql.org/
Never used it myself...
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
Hi All
Is there any inbuilt facility in postgres for connection pooling .. ??
Thanks
-
sandeep
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?
http://archives.postgresql.org/
Hei!
How do I do the connection pooling with libpq? I'm trying to modify
a radius server to fork or thread and pick a connection from the pool
and in that way be able to store 100..500 small records in a second
into postgresql.
I can create a global array of connections, but how is it done after
On Thu, Jan 25, 2001 at 05:14:50PM +0100, Gilles DAROLD wrote:
> Hi,
>
> With Apache/mod_perl it is very simple to enable DB connection
> persistance.
>
> in your perl script :
>
> use vars qw($dbh);
>
> $dbh ||= DBI::connect($datasrc, $dbuser, $dbpwd);
>
> That create a persistance connectio
On Thu, Jan 25, 2001 at 01:12:48PM -0500, Brett W. McCoy wrote:
> Apache::DBI is supposed to be supporting connection pooling in the near
> future.
I believe this is scheduled (and only technically possible) with mod_perl
2.0, which will work with Apache 2.0 -- and they're both still in alpha.
So
On Thu, 25 Jan 2001, Gilles DAROLD wrote:
> Don't forget to use Apache::DBI on top of DBI.pm. See mod_perl
> documentation
> for a complete setting.
Apache::DBI is supposed to be supporting connection pooling in the near
future.
-- Brett
http://www.chapelper
Gilles DAROLD writes:
> With Apache/mod_perl it is very simple to enable DB connection
> persistance.
>
> in your perl script :
>
> use vars qw($dbh);
>
> $dbh ||= DBI::connect($datasrc, $dbuser, $dbpwd);
Even better, Apache::DBI will pool across Perl programs, and you don't
have to change any
Quoting Guillaume Lémery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hi,
>
> my database has to handle quickly several number of queries per second
> from numerous clients.
> Because of the waste of time for connection/disconnection, Im' looking
> for a connection pooling tool.
>
> Where can I find a such tool or
Hi,
With Apache/mod_perl it is very simple to enable DB connection
persistance.
in your perl script :
use vars qw($dbh);
$dbh ||= DBI::connect($datasrc, $dbuser, $dbpwd);
That create a persistance connection to your DB and you do not have to
care
about a pool of connection. Double pipe do all
64 matches
Mail list logo
