Re: Running postgresql as a VMware ESx client

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: Glen Eustace <geustace(at)godzone(dot)net(dot)nz>
Cc: Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Running postgresql as a VMware ESx client
Date: 2008-11-24 11:22:47
Message-ID: 20081124112247.GA3861@alvh.no-ip.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Glen Eustace escribió:
>
>> Generally speaking, virtualization allows you to take a bunch of low
>> powered servers and make them live in one big box saving money on
>> electricity and management. Generally speaking, database sers are big
>> powerful boxes with lots of hard disks and gigs upon gigs of ram to
>> handle terabytes of data. Those two things seem at odds to me.
>
> If one is handling databases with Terabytes of data and 1000s of
> connections, I would agree. We will be looking at 100s of Megabytes max
> and possible several hundred connections. A much smaller workload.

You're not gonna get "several hundred connections" on a resource-starved
machine. Consider using a pooler (pgbouncer, pgpool), and reducing the
number of actual connections to the DB to a very low number of dozens.

--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrus 2008-11-24 11:53:11 Re: Returning schema name with table name
Previous Message Magnus Hagander 2008-11-24 11:12:51 Re: Postgres mail list traffic over time