From: Jim Nasby Sent: Sunday, April 03, 2016 10:19 AM >>On 4/1/16 2:54 AM, jarek wrote: >> I'll be happy to hear form users of big PostgreSQL installations, how >> many users do you have and what kind of problems we may expect. >> Is there any risk, that huge number of roles will slowdown overall >> performance ?
>Assuming you're on decent sized hardware though, 3000-4000 open connections >shouldn't be much of an >issue *as long as very few are active at once*. If >you get into a situation where there's a surge of activity >and you suddenly >have 2x more active connections than cores, you won't be happy. I've seen that >push >servers into a state where the only way to recover was to disconnect >everyone. >-- >Jim Nasby Jim - I don't quite understand the math here: on a server with 20 cores, it can only support 40 active users? I come from the SQL Server world where a single 20 core server could support hundreds/thousands of active users and/or many dozens of background/foreground data processes. Is there something fundamentally different between the two platforms relative to active user loads? How would we be able to use Postgres for larger web apps? Mike Sofen -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
