pgbouncer

What are the differences between the django apps (Django-PostgresPool, djorm-ext-pool, django-db-pool) and PG Bouncer or PG Pool? Do the apps use one of the last two packages? In this article , the author says that there is a patch starting with django 1.6. Does that mean we do not have to use any of these solutions anymore, neither the apps, nor the PG Bouncer or PG Pool package? Postgres database connections are expensive (resources) compared to MySQL connections. Django pooling apps will open many connections and keep the open. PG Bouncer and PG Pool will open fewer connections to Postgres,

I'm having trouble finding a good summary of the advantages/disadvantages of using pgbouncer for transaction pooling vs session pooling. Does it mean that a transaction heavy workload is somehow better load balanced? Is it to prevent as many connections being required to connect from pgbouncer to the database? Transaction-level pooling will help if you have apps that hold idle sessions. PgBouncer won't need to keep sessions open and idle, it just grabs one when a new transaction is started. Those idle sessions only cost you a pgbouncer connection, not a real idle Pg session with a backend

I'm running a multi-tennant website, where I would like to reduce the overhead of creating a PostgreSQL connection per request. Django's CONN_MAX_AGE allows this, at the expense of creating a lot of open idle connections to PostgreSQL (8 workers * 20 threads = 160 connections). With 10MB per connection, this consumes a lot of memory. The main purpose is reducing connection-time overhead. Hence my questions: Which setup should I use for such solution? (PgBouncer?) Can I use 'transaction' pool mode with Django? Would I be better off using something like: https://github.com/kennethreitz/django