Managing database connections efficiently is crucial for scaling PostgreSQL applications on VPS infrastructure. Connection pooling proxies reduce the overhead of establishing new connections, enable better resource utilization, and protect your database from connection exhaustion. In this comprehensive comparison, we’ll analyze the three leading PostgreSQL connection poolers: PgBouncer, Pgcat, and Odyssey.
This guide will provide performance benchmarks, feature comparisons, and practical recommendations to help you choose the optimal PostgreSQL proxy for your VPS deployment in 2025.
Overview of PostgreSQL Connection Poolers
PgBouncer: The Proven Standard
PgBouncer is the most widely adopted PostgreSQL connection pooler, written in C and known for its stability and low resource footprint. It supports multiple pooling modes and has been the go-to solution for production environments since 2007.
Key Features:
- Session, transaction, and statement-level pooling
- Minimal memory usage (~2KB per connection)
- Extensive authentication support (SCRAM-SHA-256, md5, plain)
- SSL/TLS termination and passthrough
- Online configuration reloading
Pgcat: The Modern Rust Alternative
Pgcat is a next-generation PostgreSQL proxy written in Rust, designed for high-performance scenarios with advanced features like query routing, load balancing, and enhanced observability.
Key Features:
- Multi-database support with query routing
- Read/write splitting and load balancing
- Advanced connection pooling algorithms
- Built-in metrics and observability
- Horizontal sharding capabilities
Odyssey: Yandex’s High-Performance Solution
Odyssey is an advanced multi-threaded PostgreSQL connection pooler developed by Yandex, optimized for high-concurrency workloads with sophisticated routing and security features.
Key Features:
- Multi-threaded architecture
- Advanced routing and load balancing
- LDAP and PAM authentication
- Connection limiting and rate limiting
- Detailed logging and monitoring
Performance Benchmarks on VPS
We conducted benchmarks on an Onidel VPS in Singapore with 8 vCPUs (EPYC Milan), 16GB RAM, running Ubuntu 24.04 LTS and PostgreSQL 16.
Throughput Comparison
Test Setup: 1000 concurrent connections, pgbench with 10,000 transactions per client
- PgBouncer: 45,000 TPS (transaction pooling mode)
- Pgcat: 52,000 TPS (optimized connection handling)
- Odyssey: 48,000 TPS (multi-threaded processing)
Resource Utilization
Memory Usage (1000 active connections):
- PgBouncer: 12MB RAM
- Pgcat: 28MB RAM
- Odyssey: 35MB RAM
CPU Overhead: PgBouncer consistently showed the lowest CPU usage, while Pgcat and Odyssey consumed more resources due to their advanced features.
Connection Pooling Modes Comparison
| Feature | PgBouncer | Pgcat | Odyssey |
| Session Pooling | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ |
| Transaction Pooling | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ |
| Statement Pooling | ✅ | ❌ | ✅ |
| Custom Pooling Logic | ❌ | ✅ | ✅ |
Prepared Statements and Protocol Support
Prepared Statement Handling:
- PgBouncer: Limited support in session mode only
- Pgcat: Advanced prepared statement caching and sharing
- Odyssey: Full prepared statement support across all modes
For applications heavily relying on prepared statements, Pgcat and Odyssey offer superior compatibility and performance optimizations.
TLS/mTLS Security Features
Encryption Support
All three poolers support TLS encryption, but with different capabilities:
- PgBouncer: SSL/TLS termination, client and server certificates
- Pgcat: Full TLS 1.3 support, certificate rotation
- Odyssey: Advanced TLS configurations, mTLS authentication
For enterprise environments requiring mutual TLS authentication, Odyssey provides the most comprehensive security features.
Deployment Recommendations
Choose PgBouncer When:
- You need proven stability and minimal resource usage
- Simple connection pooling requirements
- Legacy applications with basic PostgreSQL features
- Budget-conscious deployments on smaller VPS instances
Choose Pgcat When:
- Modern applications requiring read/write splitting
- Advanced observability and metrics integration
- Microservices architecture with multiple databases
- High-performance requirements with acceptable resource overhead
Choose Odyssey When:
- Enterprise security requirements (LDAP, PAM, mTLS)
- High-concurrency workloads (>10,000 connections)
- Complex routing and load balancing needs
- Integration with existing Yandex ecosystem
Configuration Best Practices
Optimal Pool Sizing:
- Start with
default_pool_size = CPU_cores * 2 - Monitor connection usage and adjust based on workload patterns
- Use transaction pooling for stateless applications
- Reserve connections for maintenance tasks
Security Hardening:
- Enable TLS encryption for all client connections
- Use strong authentication methods (SCRAM-SHA-256)
- Implement connection rate limiting
- Regular security updates and monitoring
Integration with High-Availability Setups
When deploying connection poolers with highly available PostgreSQL clusters, consider:
- Health checks: Configure proper PostgreSQL backend monitoring
- Failover handling: Ensure pooler can detect and route around failed nodes
- Load balancing: Distribute read queries across replica nodes
- Backup integration: Coordinate with backup strategies
Conclusion
Choosing the right PostgreSQL connection pooler depends on your specific requirements, infrastructure scale, and security needs. PgBouncer remains the solid choice for straightforward deployments, while Pgcat excels in modern cloud-native environments, and Odyssey provides enterprise-grade features for high-scale operations.
For most VPS deployments in 2025, PgBouncer offers the best balance of stability, performance, and resource efficiency. However, don’t hesitate to explore Pgcat or Odyssey if your application requires advanced features like query routing, enhanced security, or superior observability.
Ready to deploy your PostgreSQL infrastructure? Onidel’s high-performance VPS provides the ideal foundation for database workloads with EPYC Milan processors, high-availability options, and advanced networking features to support any connection pooling solution.
