| From: | Rod Taylor <rbt(at)rbt(dot)ca> |
|---|---|
| To: | Ron Johnson <ron(dot)l(dot)johnson(at)cox(dot)net> |
| Cc: | PgSQL Performance ML <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Hardware recommendations to scale to silly load |
| Date: | 2003-08-30 13:58:12 |
| Message-ID: | 1062251891.83670.25.camel@jester |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance |
> My question is: is that current peak rate ("300 inserts/updates
> *or* 2500 selects") based upon 1 connection, or many connections?
> With 4 CPUs, and a 4 disk RAID10, I wouldn't be surprised if 4 con-
> current connections gives the optimum speed.
Optimum number of active workers is probably between 10 and 16. 4 doing
math, 4 doing a dma transfer of data, and 4 to be available the instant
one of the other 8 completes.
On FreeBSD it seems to work that way when there is a mix of activity
with the database.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2003-08-30 13:58:56 | Re: SetVariable |
| Previous Message | Richard Jones | 2003-08-30 13:09:03 | Selecting random rows efficiently |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Rod Taylor | 2003-08-30 14:01:58 | Re: Selecting random rows efficiently |
| Previous Message | Rob Nagler | 2003-08-30 13:16:13 | How to force Nested Loop plan? |