>-----Original Message----- >From: pgsql-general-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx >[mailto:pgsql-general-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Shiva Sarna >Sent: vrijdag 2 maart 2007 6:03 >To: Bill Moran; Joshua D. Drake >Cc: Shiva Sarna; pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx >Subject: Re: [GENERAL] supporting 2000 simultaneous connections. > >Hi, > >Thanks for your reply and help. > >The web application I am talking about is a Learning >Management System. > >By simultaneous users I mean that all 2000 users should be >able to access the application and for example say take a test. As Bill Moran already said: "You might want to take some time to investigate what "simultaneous users" really means for your application. For example, in a web application, 2000 simultaneous users usually equates to less than 100 actual database connections, as web users spend most of their time reading pages and very little time actually talking to the database." This should also be true for your application too, especially since it's a web application. You don't need a persistent connection per user, but can rather share then between different users. When taking tests I'm not that fast and reading, thinking and clicking will take some seconds. Your system is well capable of storing my answers quickly enough (and probably getting the question as well). >We are using JNDI connection pooling. > >I think we have to now think about upgrading the hardware as well. Test this first with you existing setup. Remember, 2000 web clients is not the same as 2000 database connections! Your question was if most likely interpreted whether postgres can sustain 2000 connections to the database at once, rather than whether it can handle 2000 web users. - Joris >thanks for your time. > >regards > >Shiva > > >--- Bill Moran <wmoran@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> In response to "Joshua D. Drake" >> <jd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: >> >> > Bill Moran wrote: >> > > In response to Shiva Sarna >> <shiva.sarna@xxxxxxxxx>: >> > > >> > >> Hi, >> > >> >> > >> I am working on a web application where the >> front end is struts framework >> > >> and back end is PgSQL 7.4. >> > >> > *cough*, you are going to greatly decrease your >> ability to scale if you >> > are running anything less than 8.1. >> > > >> > > Performance _will_ degrade if all of those >> connections are busy at once, but >> > > that's going to happen with any shared system. >> The disk can only read from >> > > one area at a time, and other system resources >> will be contended for as well. >> > >> > 7.4 doesn't scale to what he wants, even on big >> hardware. >> >> Oops ... didn't notice that. >> >> -- >> Bill Moran >> Collaborative Fusion Inc.
