Just to say you don't need a mega server to keep thousands connections with Oracle, it's just trivial, nor CPU affinity and other stuff you may or may not need with Sybase :-)
Regarding PostgreSQL, I think it'll only benefit to have an integrated connection pooler as it'll make happy all populations anyway: - those who don't like the idea may always disable it :-) - those who have a lot but mostly inactive sessions will be happy to simplify session pooling - those who really seeking for the most optimal workload on their servers will be happy twice: if there are any PG scalability limits, integrated pooler will be in most cases more performant than external; if there are no PG scalability limits - it'll still help to size PG most optimally according a HW or OS capacities.. Rgds, -Dimitri On 6/3/09, Kevin Grittner <kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov> wrote: > Dimitri <dimitrik...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Few weeks ago tested a customer application on 16 cores with Oracle: >> - 20,000 sessions in total >> - 70,000 queries/sec >> >> without any problem on a mid-range Sun box + Solaris 10.. > > I'm not sure what point you are trying to make. Could you elaborate? > > (If it's that Oracle doesn't need an external connection pool, then > are you advocating that PostgreSQL include that in the base product?) > > -Kevin > -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
