On Thursday 16 January 2003 11:59, Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder wrote: > On Thu, 2003-01-16 at 17:42, D'Arcy J.M. Cain wrote: > > We are also looking at hardware solutions, multi-CPU PCs with tons (24GB) > > of memory. I know that memory will improve access if it prevents > > swapping but how well does PostgreSQL utilize multiple CPUs? > > At most one CPU is used for any single postgres backend (that means for > any single database connection). So, if your load problem is single > queries being too slow, thee's nothing you can do with adding more CPUs. > If your problem is many connections maxing out the db, PostgreSQL can > take full advantage of multiple CPUs.
I most definitely have multiple queries running at once. My main issue is whether PostgreSQL scales up properly or does it get bogged down with too many locked queries. > Of course, most db apps still are not cpu bound, so you'd have to do > some careful benchmarking first or you'll be spending too much money. Natch. -- D'Arcy J.M. Cain <darcy@{druid|vex}.net> | Democracy is three wolves http://www.druid.net/darcy/ | and a sheep voting on +1 416 425 1212 (DoD#0082) (eNTP) | what's for dinner. ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly