Re: pgbench could not send data to client: Broken pipe - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Greg Smith
Subject Re: pgbench could not send data to client: Broken pipe
Date
Msg-id 4C89225A.1080504@2ndquadrant.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pgbench could not send data to client: Broken pipe  ("Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>)
List pgsql-performance
Kevin Grittner wrote:
> In my experience you can expect the response time benefit of
> reducing the size of your connection pool to match available
> resources to be more noticeable than the throughput improvements.
> This directly contradicts many people's intuition, revealing the
> downside of "gut feel".
>

This is why I focused on showing there won't actually be a significant
throughput reduction, because that part is the most counterintuitive I
think.  Accurately modeling the latency improvements of pooling requires
much harder math, and it depends quite a bit on whether incoming traffic
is even or in bursts.  Easier in many cases to just swallow expectations
and estimates and just try it instead.

--
Greg Smith  2ndQuadrant US  Baltimore, MD
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
greg@2ndQuadrant.com   www.2ndQuadrant.us


pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: "Kevin Grittner"
Date:
Subject: Re: pgbench could not send data to client: Broken pipe
Next
From: Mason Harding
Date:
Subject: Slow SQL lookup due to every field being listed in SORT KEY