Thread: Database connection for Tbl_B established
I have a question regarding "connection for xxyy established" The situation below shows records being added to 3 tables which are heavily populated. We never "update" any table, only read from them. Or we delete a full-day worth of records from them.
The question is: Is this method of repeatedly establishing and re-establishing database connections with the same 3 tables efficient? As in, is there a better way to add data?
Apr 25 03:38:47 saw alert_mgr[33696]: Database connection for Tbl_A established
Apr 25 03:38:51 saw alert_mgr[33698]: Database connection for Tbl_B established
Apr 25 03:38:54 saw alert_mgr[33700]: Database connection for Tbl_A established
Apr 25 03:38:55 saw alert_mgr[25182]: user_new_locked: added 64 entries (66880 total)
Apr 25 03:38:57 saw alert_mgr[33702]: Database connection for Tbl_B established
Apr 25 03:38:59 saw alert_mgr[33704]: Database connection for Tbl_A established
Apr 25 03:39:02 saw alert_mgr[33706]: Database connection for Tbl_B established
Apr 25 03:39:04 saw alert_mgr[33708]: Database connection for Tbl_C established
Apr 25 03:39:05 saw alert_mgr[33710]: Database connection for Tbl_A established
Apr 25 03:39:06 saw alert_mgr[25182]: user_new_locked: added 64 entries (66944 total)
Apr 25 03:39:06 saw alert_mgr[33712]: Database connection for Tbl_B established
Apr 25 03:39:08 saw alert_mgr[33714]: Database connection for Tbl_A established
Apr 25 03:39:11 saw alert_mgr[33716]: Database connection for Tbl_B established
Apr 25 03:39:13 saw alert_mgr[33718]: Database connection for Tbl_A established
Apr 25 03:39:15 saw alert_mgr[25182]: user_new_locked: added 64 entries (67008 total)
Apr 25 03:39:18 saw alert_mgr[33720]: Database connection for Tbl_B established
--
Yudhvir Singh Sidhu
408 375 3134 cell
The question is: Is this method of repeatedly establishing and re-establishing database connections with the same 3 tables efficient? As in, is there a better way to add data?
Apr 25 03:38:47 saw alert_mgr[33696]: Database connection for Tbl_A established
Apr 25 03:38:51 saw alert_mgr[33698]: Database connection for Tbl_B established
Apr 25 03:38:54 saw alert_mgr[33700]: Database connection for Tbl_A established
Apr 25 03:38:55 saw alert_mgr[25182]: user_new_locked: added 64 entries (66880 total)
Apr 25 03:38:57 saw alert_mgr[33702]: Database connection for Tbl_B established
Apr 25 03:38:59 saw alert_mgr[33704]: Database connection for Tbl_A established
Apr 25 03:39:02 saw alert_mgr[33706]: Database connection for Tbl_B established
Apr 25 03:39:04 saw alert_mgr[33708]: Database connection for Tbl_C established
Apr 25 03:39:05 saw alert_mgr[33710]: Database connection for Tbl_A established
Apr 25 03:39:06 saw alert_mgr[25182]: user_new_locked: added 64 entries (66944 total)
Apr 25 03:39:06 saw alert_mgr[33712]: Database connection for Tbl_B established
Apr 25 03:39:08 saw alert_mgr[33714]: Database connection for Tbl_A established
Apr 25 03:39:11 saw alert_mgr[33716]: Database connection for Tbl_B established
Apr 25 03:39:13 saw alert_mgr[33718]: Database connection for Tbl_A established
Apr 25 03:39:15 saw alert_mgr[25182]: user_new_locked: added 64 entries (67008 total)
Apr 25 03:39:18 saw alert_mgr[33720]: Database connection for Tbl_B established
--
Yudhvir Singh Sidhu
408 375 3134 cell
"Y Sidhu" <ysidhu@gmail.com> writes: > The question is: Is this method of repeatedly establishing and > re-establishing database connections with the same 3 tables efficient? No. Launching a new backend process is a fairly expensive proposition; if you're striving for performance you don't want to do it for just one or two queries. Look into connection pooling ... regards, tom lane
You are referring to pgpool? BTW, thanks for this insight.
Yudhvir
========
--
Yudhvir Singh Sidhu
408 375 3134 cell
Yudhvir
========
On 5/30/07, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
"Y Sidhu" <ysidhu@gmail.com> writes:
> The question is: Is this method of repeatedly establishing and
> re-establishing database connections with the same 3 tables efficient?
No. Launching a new backend process is a fairly expensive proposition;
if you're striving for performance you don't want to do it for just one
or two queries. Look into connection pooling ...
regards, tom lane
--
Yudhvir Singh Sidhu
408 375 3134 cell