ibatis-user-java mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Clinton Begin <clinton.be...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [SURVEY] How many connections are in your pool?
Date Tue, 20 Jan 2009 19:39:37 GMT
It sounds like you're still using a "pool", but your max, min, idle, and
active connections are all equal (i.e. 16).  Otherwise, how do you allocate
connections to the incoming requests?

Cheers,
Clinton

On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 12:33 PM, Nicholoz Koka Kiknadze <kiknadze@gmail.com
> wrote:

> Ours is an application that requires guaranteed response times under 50 ms,
> so:
>
> 1) We dropped using any kind of pool, so that
> 2) number of constantly open connections equals to the number of processors
> (16)
>
> 3) I know you were asking about pool, but still I dared to respond with
> this no-pool variant because I think maybe what you are asking can be
> reformulated as: is there any use of DB pool in a short lived transaction
> scenario, or its better to have one connection per CPU. Testing our app made
> us to drop using pool with TimesTen (in memory) database. Now I started to
> suspect that using using db pool (I've mostly used dbcp ) in other less
> demanding projects (but again w/o long running transactions) was just saving
> development time (let pool handle concurrency issues), but not any
> substantial performance gain. Wonder what others think...
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 8:43 AM, Clinton Begin <clinton.begin@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I've been studying a few large enterprise applications and have noticed an
>> interesting trend... many of these apps have HUNDREDS of connections (like
>> 600) available or even open in their connection pools...
>>
>> Survey Questions:
>>
>>   1. How many connections do you have available in your pool?
>>   2. And if you know, how many CPU cores are available on your database
>> server (or cluster)?
>>   3. If you have 2x or 3x more connections than you do CPUs, do you have a
>> reason that you could share?
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Clinton
>>
>
>

Mime
View raw message