Re: Scalability

Top at 350-400 concurrent connections! Although more than my project's
peak estimates, it is a bit discomforting. Are there any *promising*
load testing numbers with Windows 2003? I'd be happy to share results
from my simulations.

Matt

> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Scalability
> From: "Joshua D. Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
> Date: Sat, October 28, 2006 8:38 pm
> To: Bill <postgresql(at)dbginc(dot)com>
> Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
>
> Bill wrote:
> > I am new to PostgreSQL and just beginning to learn the product. I will
> > probrobably be using it exclusively on Windows.
> >
> > I was surprised to learn that PostgreSQL creates a new process for each
> > connection. Doesn't this severely limit its scalability by consuming
> > resources rapidly on the server as the number of user increases?
>
> The Windows version is not anywhere near as scalable as the unix
> versions. Depending on your hardware you will top out a Windows
> installation about about 350-400 connections. You can get more out of
> Windows by modifying the registry but I am unsure of how far it will go.
>
> I have Linux installations that happily hum along with 2000-5000
> connections.
>
> So in answer to your question, in general -- no the process methodology
> we use does not limit scalability and it makes our code base much
> simpler that the equivalent threading model.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Joshua D. Drake