Re: Scalability in postgres

Just to say you don't need a mega server to keep thousands connections
with Oracle, it's just trivial, nor CPU affinity and other stuff you
may or may not need with Sybase :-)

Regarding PostgreSQL, I think it'll only benefit to have an integrated
connection pooler as it'll make happy all populations anyway:
- those who don't like the idea may always disable it :-)
- those who have a lot but mostly inactive sessions will be happy to
simplify session pooling
- those who really seeking for the most optimal workload on their
servers will be happy twice: if there are any PG scalability limits,
integrated pooler will be in most cases more performant than external;
if there are no PG scalability limits - it'll still help to size PG
most optimally according a HW or OS capacities..

Rgds,
-Dimitri

On 6/3/09, Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> wrote:
> Dimitri <dimitrik(dot)fr(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> Few weeks ago tested a customer application on 16 cores with Oracle:
>> - 20,000 sessions in total
>> - 70,000 queries/sec
>>
>> without any problem on a mid-range Sun box + Solaris 10..
>
> I'm not sure what point you are trying to make. Could you elaborate?
>
> (If it's that Oracle doesn't need an external connection pool, then
> are you advocating that PostgreSQL include that in the base product?)
>
> -Kevin
>