Re: Connection pool count too high?
- From: "William \(Bill\) Vaughn" <billvaRemoveThis@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2005 09:40:04 -0700
I'm doing a "Hitchhikers' Guide to Connecting" (extracted from my book) that
covers it. So does the post-con ADO.NET best practices workshop. Be sure to
tell me you're there (and sit up front so you can see the demos).
--
____________________________________
William (Bill) Vaughn
Author, Mentor, Consultant
Microsoft MVP
INETA Speaker
www.betav.com/blog/billva
www.betav.com
Please reply only to the newsgroup so that others can benefit.
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
__________________________________
"Dan" <Dan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:C1F2996B-8269-41DF-94B3-AEEE649E1A58@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Thanks for your response, now I know where to start looking for problems.
>
> I will be at VSlive Orlando and would love to hear you speak on this
> topic.
> What session will cover this?
>
> "William (Bill) Vaughn" wrote:
>
>> I've written about this many times so search the archives for more
>> details.
>> Yes, the counts do look high. Each of these numbers can be evaluated in a
>> number of ways. If the number of pools looks high (and it does) I would
>> tend
>> to think that the conditions that require a new pool are changing. It's
>> not
>> just the connection string that determines if a new pool is needed. It's
>> also the transaction enlistment and the process ID. Each application
>> domain
>> (app domain) gets its own pool, but within that scope each transaction
>> gets
>> a new pool. These pools are not destroyed until they are empty for some
>> time
>> and the app domain is gone.
>> If the number of concurrent users exceeds the number of pooled
>> connections,
>> then yes, I expect there is a leak or your system is unable to keep up
>> with
>> the load. As a new user arrives, if the system is not finished with the
>> previous user a new connection has to be created to deal with it. The
>> additional load (of the subsequent user) exacerbates the problem. This is
>> not an issue of closing connections in code, it's not closing the
>> connection
>> in time--before it's needed again. Make sense?
>>
>> I'm giving an ADO.NET workshop in Orlando (Oct 13th) and in Sydney the
>> week
>> of the 28th of November. I'll discuss these issues there.
>>
>> --
>> ____________________________________
>> William (Bill) Vaughn
>> Author, Mentor, Consultant
>> Microsoft MVP
>> www.betav.com/blog/billva
>> www.betav.com
>> www.sqlreportingservices.net
>> Please reply only to the newsgroup so that others can benefit.
>> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
>> rights.
>> __________________________________
>>
>>
>> "Dan" <Dan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>> news:6823E40C-7F4A-4E30-B5F9-E97B1C8E2D9D@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >I am trying to determine if the # of connection pools our app is using
>> >is
>> > 'normal'/acceptable, or if there is a problem.
>> >
>> > Our web application is all asp.net, using ADO.NET and SQL Server 2000
>> > STD.
>> > The app is run on a Windows 2003 Server Web Edition and IIS 6. The
>> > application is broken up into 2 webs in IIS. One that contains only one
>> > Application Virtual Directory, and the other that is broken up into 7
>> > Application Virtual Directories.
>> >
>> > Every Sql Command uses the same connection string. All data access
>> > opens
>> > and
>> > closes its own connection immediately before and after the command is
>> > run.
>> >
>> > We normally have about 45 - 60 concurrent users of the app at any given
>> > time. And every page runs several sql commands every time they load.
>> >
>> > Below are the performance counters from both the web and sql servers
>> > that
>> > I
>> > thought were important for this research.
>> >
>> > 142 connection pools and 429 pooled connections seems very high to me.
>> > I
>> > know that it is hard to determine what should be 'normal' without
>> > knowing
>> > more about the app, but at a very high level, does this seem normal or
>> > would
>> > this indicate there is a problem?
>> >
>> >
>> > Connection string
>> > -----------------
>> > "User ID=<uname>;Password=<pword>;Initial Catalog=<dbname>;Data
>> > Source=<ip>;"
>> >
>> >
>> > Web Server Perf Counters
>> > ------------------------
>> > .NET CLR DATA _global_
>> > SqlClient Current # connection pools: 142
>> > SqlClient Current # pooled and nonpooled connections: 429
>> > SqlClient Current # pooled connections: 429
>> >
>> > Web Service
>> > Current Connections: 46
>> > Maximum Connections: 158
>> > Maximum Anonymous Users: 91
>> > Get Request/ sec: <10 - 20 avg>
>> >
>> > SQL Server Perf Counters
>> > ------------------------
>> > SQLServer:GeneralStatistics
>> > User Connections: 86
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
.
- References:
- Re: Connection pool count too high?
- From: William \(Bill\) Vaughn
- Re: Connection pool count too high?
- From: Dan
- Re: Connection pool count too high?
- Prev by Date: Re: Connection pool count too high?
- Next by Date: Dataset/DataGrid and Update Problem!
- Previous by thread: Re: Connection pool count too high?
- Next by thread: Re: running SQL Scripts from VB.Net - is OSQL the best way?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
