Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Peformance Tuning Opterons/ Hard Disk Layout

From: "Bruno Almeida do Lago" <teolupus(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
Cc: <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Peformance Tuning Opterons/ Hard Disk Layout
Date: 2005-02-24 13:28:34
Message-ID: 421dd635.7b3d0b0f.1e05.1618@smtp.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
No problems my friend :P

I thought that since the beginning and just sent the e-mail to confirm if
there was no software limitation.


Best Wishes,
Bruno Almeida do Lago

 


-----Original Message-----
From: Josh Berkus [mailto:josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2005 6:02 PM
To: Bruno Almeida do Lago
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Peformance Tuning Opterons/ Hard Disk Layout

Bruno,

> For example, 150 active connections on a medium-end
> 32-bit Linux server will consume significant system resources, and 600 is
> about the limit."

That, is, "is about the limit for a medium-end 32-bit Linux server".
Sorry 
if the implication didn't translate well.   If you use beefier hardware, of 
course, you can manage more connections; personally I've never needed more 
than 1000, even on a web site that gets 100,000 d.u.v.

-- 
--Josh

Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco


In response to

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: John AllgoodDate: 2005-02-24 18:31:38
Subject: Peformance Tuning Opterons/ Hard Disk Layout
Previous:From: Markus SchaberDate: 2005-02-24 12:13:09
Subject: Re: is pg_autovacuum so effective ?

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group