On 17/07/10 16:50, Srikanth wrote:
> I am sending u the query along with execution plan. Please help
>
> explain analyze select
> s.*,a.actid,a.phone,d.domid,d.domname,d.domno,a.actno,a.actname,p.descr
> as svcdescr
> from vwsubsmin s
> inner join packages p on s.svcno=p.pkgno
> inner join account
Hello,
On 17 July 2010 12:50, Srikanth wrote:
> I am sending u the query along with execution plan. Please help
>
It would be better if you start with it:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.4/interactive/indexes.html
http://www.mohawksoft.org/?q=node/56
--
Sergey Konoplev
Blog: http://gray-he
From: Rajesh Kumar Mallah
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Pooling in Core WAS: Need help in performance tuning.
Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2010 08:06:09 +0530
Message-ID:
> Thanks for the thought but it (-C) does not work .
Still you need:
pgbench's -c <= (pool_size + reserve_pool_size)
--
Tatsuo Ishii
SRA OSS
Thanks for the thought but it (-C) does not work .
>
>
> BTW, I think you should use -C option with pgbench for this kind of
> testing. -C establishes connection for each transaction, which is
> pretty much similar to the real world application which do not use
> connection pooling. You will be s
> pgbench cannot be used for testing with pgbouncer if number of
> pgbench clients exceeds pool_size + reserve_pool_size of pgbouncer.
> pgbench keeps waiting doing nothing. I am using pgbench of postgresql 8.1.
> Are there changes to pgbench in this aspect ?
Pgbench won't start actual transactio
On Sun, 2010-07-18 at 21:48 +0530, Rajesh Kumar Mallah wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Sorry, if posting here was not proper instead of starting new thread
> (I am really not sure if its bad thing to do)
>
> I would like to share my recent experience on implementation of
> client side pooling using pgbouncer
Looks like ,
pgbench cannot be used for testing with pgbouncer if number of
pgbench clients exceeds pool_size + reserve_pool_size of pgbouncer.
pgbench keeps waiting doing nothing. I am using pgbench of postgresql 8.1.
Are there changes to pgbench in this aspect ?
regds
Rajesh Kumar Mallah.
On
I am sending u the query along with execution plan. Please help
explain analyze select
s.*,a.actid,a.phone,d.domid,d.domname,d.domno,a.actno,a.actname,p.descr
as svcdescr
from vwsubsmin s
inner join packages p on s.svcno=p.pkgno
inner join account a on a.actno=s.actno
inner join ssgdom d on a.
On Jul 9, 2010, at 8:33 PM, Craig Ringer wrote:
> On 10/07/2010 9:25 AM, Josh Berkus wrote:
>>
>>> It *is* the last place you want to put it, but putting it there can
>>> be much better than not putting it *anywhere*, which is what we've
>>> often seen.
>>
>> Well, what you proposed is an admis
On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 10:55 PM, Greg Smith wrote:
> Rajesh Kumar Mallah wrote:
>
>> the no of clients was 10 ( -c 10) carrying out 1 transactions each
>> (-t 1) .
>> pgbench db was initilised with scaling factor -s 100.
>>
>> since client count was less there was no queuing of request
ok ,
now the question is , is it possible to dig out from from postgresql
database
server if connection pooling is needed ? In our case eg i have kept
max_connections = 300 if i reduce below 250 i get error "max connection
reached."
on connecting to db directly, if i put pgbouncer i get less
Rajesh Kumar Mallah wrote:
the no of clients was 10 ( -c 10) carrying out 1 transactions
each (-t 1) .
pgbench db was initilised with scaling factor -s 100.
since client count was less there was no queuing of requests in pgbouncer
i would prefer to say it was in 'passthrough' mode.
Nice suggestion to try ,
I will put pgbouncer on raw hardware and run pgbench from same hardware.
regds
rajesh kumar mallah.
> Why in VM (openvz container) ?
>
> Did you also try it in the same OS as your appserver ?
>
> Perhaps even connecting from appserver via unix seckets ?
>
> > and all my
note: my postgresql server & pgbouncer were not in virtualised environment
in the first setup. Only application server has many openvz containers.
Hi,
Sorry, if posting here was not proper instead of starting new thread
(I am really not sure if its bad thing to do)
I would like to share my recent experience on implementation of
client side pooling using pgbouncer. By client side i mean that
the the pgbouncer process in not on same machine
On 12/07/10 14:15, A. Kretschmer wrote:
Use timeofday() instead, now() returns the transaction starting time.
timeofday() is a legacy function kept only for backwards-compatibility.
It returns a string, which is quite awkward. Use clock_timestamp() instead.
--
Heikki Linnakangas
Enterpri
16 matches
Mail list logo
