From: | Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Navin Chandra <navin(dot)pandit(at)ilfstechnologies(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Query regarding PostGre database |
Date: | 2011-08-18 05:21:43 |
Message-ID: | CAOR=d=3GC1fF6wC8HHr8rbcYfa6V8NGKRmzR1U1irFRi2T4MZg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 9:52 PM, Navin Chandra
<navin(dot)pandit(at)ilfstechnologies(dot)com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am an application developer, want to use ‘PostGre’ as backend. May I know
> what is the maximum possible number of concurrent users?
> Your acknowledgement will be highly appreciated.
FYI, we call it PostgreSQL or pgsql around here.
The maximum number you can create is much more than the maximum number
you like want to create. What are you looking at doing? Might
connection pooling be a good match for that?
I have session db servers that keep ~800 persistent connections open
for small single table queries and they do just fine. I've tested
thousands of connections with decent performance. However having lots
of open connections can lead to "thundering herd" problems and is
generally suboptimal.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Craig Ringer | 2011-08-18 05:40:52 | Re: Query regarding PostGre database |
Previous Message | John R Pierce | 2011-08-18 05:21:32 | Re: Query regarding PostGre database |