Re: Virtualization vs. sharing a server - Mailing list pgsql-admin

From Rodger Donaldson
Subject Re: Virtualization vs. sharing a server
Date
Msg-id 64633.203.144.40.146.1269983303.squirrel@israel.diaspora.gen.nz
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Virtualization vs. sharing a server  (Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: Virtualization vs. sharing a server  (Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-admin
On Tue, March 30, 2010 06:09, Greg Smith wrote:
> Michael Gould wrote:
>>
>> I don't know why virtualization is considered a no-no...Since these
>> are all quad core with 32 gig running Windows 2003 64 bit, we can run
>> about 100 users concurrently on each application server before we
>> start to see a strain.
>>
>
> You answered your own question here.  Ramiro is looking for suggestions
> for how to scale up to >500 connections at once, and it's not that
> likely virtualization can fill any useful role in that context.

That rather depends on your virtualisation layer.  We haven't run large PG
databases on our zLinux/zVM machines, but we have Oracle DBs running
comparable connection numbers without any issues.

pgsql-admin by date:

Previous
From: Alex Hunsaker
Date:
Subject: Re: ERROR: could not open segment 1 of relation 1663/743352/743420 (target block 6407642): No such file or directory
Next
From: "John Lister"
Date:
Subject: Re: Strange deletion problem