Re: Setting up a database for 10000 concurrent users

From: Lincoln Yeoh <lyeoh(at)pop(dot)jaring(dot)my>
To: Richard Huxton <dev(at)archonet(dot)com>, Poul Møller Hansen <freebsd(at)pbnet(dot)dk>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Setting up a database for 10000 concurrent users
Date: 2005-09-06 16:56:12
Message-ID: 5.2.1.1.1.20050907004102.04c718a8@localhost
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

At 09:45 PM 9/5/2005 +0100, Richard Huxton wrote:

>Poul Møller Hansen wrote:
>>I'm trying to setup a database for 10000 concurrent users for a test.
>>I have a system with 1GB of RAM where I will use 512MB for PostgreSQL.
>>It is running SuSE 9.3
>
>I think you're being horribly optimistic if you actually want 10000
>concurrent connections, with users all doing things. Even if you only
>allow 1MB for each connection that's 10GB of RAM you'd want. Plus a big
>chunk more to actually cache your database files and do work in. Then, if
>you had 10,000 concurrent queries you'd probably want a mainframe to
>handle all the concurrency, or perhaps a 64-CPU box would suffice...

10GB of RAM isn't that farfetched nowadays.

However I/O might be a problem. A single drive can typically write/read
about 10MB a second (64KB chunks random access - not sure if you'd want to
bet on getting sequential throughput ;) ).

Anyway, it'll be something interesting to see ;).

Link.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Vlad 2005-09-06 17:45:47 "select ..... for update of ..." doesn't support full qualified table name?
Previous Message Michal Hlavac 2005-09-06 16:06:25 tsearch2 & unicode