From: | Andreas Kretschmer <andreas(at)a-kretschmer(dot)de> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-novice(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Scaling / Number of simultanous connections |
Date: | 2019-02-07 17:56:56 |
Message-ID: | 15a80926-b928-4121-2e8f-6b409e2be4e2@a-kretschmer.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-novice |
Am 07.02.19 um 18:43 schrieb Nico Callewaert:
> Hi,
>
> I'm about to start porting a Firebird DB to Postgres. Next thing will
> be upgrading all customers. Most of our customers have around 30 users
> or less. We have a few 'bigger' customers that maybe have 50 users or
> a bit more still. The application is a Delphi application that is in
> fact a 'fat' client that uses a permanent connection to the DB. I've
> read that Postgres uses 1 process per user. So that means 30-50
> processes at the same time.
>
> I have 2 questions about this
> - I guess this situation is not really a heavy workload? Or is it?
not really, assuming not all connections are active the same time.
> - And is it correct that a single process cannot access multiple CPU
> cores, so things are not multi threaded? I guess MySQL used that
> argument somewhere, but I'm not sure, forgive me if I'm mistaken.
yes and no, since 9.6 we can use multiple cores for one query, using
multiple processes.
>
> The whole thing boils down to this question: Am I save with 30-50
> simultanous users for speed and scaling?
>
most likely yes, on modern hardware.
Regards, Andreas
--
2ndQuadrant - The PostgreSQL Support Company.
www.2ndQuadrant.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Danny Severns | 2019-02-08 14:20:36 | RE: Scaling / Number of simultaneous connections |
Previous Message | Nico Callewaert | 2019-02-07 17:43:49 | Scaling / Number of simultanous connections |