On 08/07/2016 17:07, AMatveev@xxxxxxxx wrote:
Hi
The test performs about 11K lines of code
Oracle: about 5M
postgreSql: about 160М
Do you have 100 CPUs on this system which apparently doesn't have 16G
of RAM available for PG to use?
We can say at fact:
We currently work at oracle.
Our code base about 4000 k line of code
In out last project we have:
3000 current connection
200 active session
So 16g it's very optimistic.
Of course we think about buy hardware or software.
It's other question.
So with this memory consumption it can be really cheaper to by Oracle.
If not, you should probably consider connection pooling to reduce the
number of PG sessions to something approaching the number of CPUs/cores
you have in the system.
It's possible only with application server,
No, you can deploy PgPool or PgBouncer.
Apart from that, I just checked in my system. User sessions have size of 16M. Not 160M.
for local network thick client has reasonable advantages.
We just can't implement today all functions on thin client.
--
Achilleas Mantzios
IT DEV Lead
IT DEPT
Dynacom Tankers Mgmt
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
