On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 3:52 PM, Kevin Grittner
<Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov> wrote:
> Heck, I think an even *more* trivial admission control policy which
> limits the number of active database transactions released to
> execution might solve a lot of problems.
That wouldn't have any benefit over what you can already do with a
connection pooler, though, I think. In fact, it would probably be
strictly worse, since enlarging the number of backends slows the
system down even if they aren't actually doing anything much.
> Of course, what you
> propose is more useful, although I'd be inclined to think that we'd
> want an admission control layer which could be configured so support
> both of these and much more. Done correctly, it could almost
> completely eliminate the downward slope after you hit the "knee" in
> many performance graphs.
And world peace!
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise Postgres Company