Dnia 2017-05-23, wto o godzinie 11:39 -0700, Steve Crawford pisze: > The answer, as always, is "it depends." > > > Can you give us an overview of your setup? The appropriate setup for > small numbers of long-running analytical queries (typically faster > CPUs) will be different than a setup for handling numerous > simultaneous connections (typically more cores). I have pool of clients (~30) inserting to database about 50 records per second (in total from all clients) and small numer (<10) clients querying database for those records once per 10s. Other queries are rare and irregular. The biggest table has ~ 100mln records (older records are purged nightly). Database size is ~13GB. I near future I'm expecting ~150 clients and 250 inserts per second and more clients querying database. Server is handling also apache with simple web application written in python. For the same price, I can get 8C/3.2GHz or 14C/2.6GHz. Which one will be better ? > > But CPU is often not the limiting factor. With a better understanding > of your needs, people here can offer suggestions for memory, storage, > pooling, network, etc. > > > Cheers, > Steve > > > > On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 11:29 AM, Jarek <jarek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hello! > > I've heavy loaded PostgreSQL server, which I want to upgrade, > so it will > handle more traffic. Can I estimate what is better: more cores > or > higher frequency ? I expect that pg_stat should give some > tips, but > don't know where to start... > > best regards > Jarek > > > > -- > Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list > (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance > > -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
