[pgpool-general: 1806] Re: pgpool vs. pgbouncer

Joshua D. Drake jd at commandprompt.com
Thu May 30 16:09:04 JST 2013

On 05/29/2013 03:37 PM, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:

>>> Also, I'm not sure 10 clients with 1 thread is large enough contention
>>> to push the performance of either pgpool or pgbouncer.
>> Agreed. Although I do think seeing the slower portion of pgbench is
>> interesting for the standard pooling case. I wonder, does pgpool-ii
>> parse even when in just pooling mode?
> Yes.

Well that would easily account for the drop in performance.

I have been thinking a lot about pgPool lately because we have found 
ourselves deploying it quite a bit. I am curious if there is a way to 
further isolate the various capabilities of the software.

We never use the replication features but we do use load balancing. I 
would like to find a way to make the connection pooling. and or and with 
the load balancing much more efficient.

> BTW, by knowing that pgbouncer's transaction mode is alomost 40%
> slower than session mode, I noticed what people wants to have is not
> just throughput, but the ability to allow large number of concurrent
> connections unless pgbouncers's user rarely use the transaction mode.

I know that every time we set it up, we only use session mode. Obviously 
we have installed it a lot.



More information about the pgpool-general mailing list