On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 5:27 PM, Olivier NOEL <noli...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2011/10/6 Guillaume Lelarge <guilla...@lelarge.info>: > > [...] > > >> And it's not. Ok, there is some overhead, but it's veeery slow. > >> > > > > How did you check that? > > > > You may be right in a specific setting, but I have no issues getting > > better performance with pgpool. > > We tested our java webapp with pgpool and without pgpool, same > servers, we only change the target IP in the JDBC config file in > Tomcat. > > We have a small XML processing servlet with informations to insert in > the databases (streaming replication). We verified that all requests a > balanced. > > XML sizes varies from 300KB to 3MB. > > Time to process the file completely for a fully functional database : > > - with pgpool : 20-45min (20min for the smaller ones to 45min for the big > one) > - without pgpool : 4-15min > > Then we tested browsing in our webapp : > > - with pgpool : 30-45s to display a list of full customers > informations (depending on the numbers of customers, 2400 to 12000 > customers on the same page) > - without pgpool : 5-10s > > Pgpool *should* be faster, but it isn't. > Any response to this? I really get slower database connection from pgpool comparing with connection directly to master node. > > > > > -- > > Guillaume > > http://blog.guillaume.lelarge.info > > http://www.dalibo.com > > > > > -- Armin
_______________________________________________ Pgpool-general mailing list Pgpool-general@pgfoundry.org http://pgfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/pgpool-general
