On 08/12/2017 09:05 PM, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> https://www.postgresql.org/about/
> |There are active PostgreSQL systems in production environments that manage in
> |excess of 4 terabytes of data.
>
> I think that gives the impression that PG isn't regularly used with larger
> data, and should either be removed or (periodically) updated. I don't expect
> we're near the technical or other limitations, but at least two of our
> customers have DBs currently 10-20TB and continuing to grow.
the entire /about page is in serious need of a major overhaul - this has
been mentioned^complained about a number of times before but nobody has
yet started the bikesheding on an actual wording by proposing a patch ;)
The same goes for some other pages (/awards, /casestudies and
/advantages being the worst ones imho)
>
> https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/FAQ#How_does_PostgreSQL_use_CPU_resources.3F
> |The PostgreSQL server is process-based (not threaded), and uses one operating
> |system process per database session. A single database session (connection)
> |cannot utilize more than one CPU. Of course, multiple sessions are
> |automatically spread across all available CPUs by your operating system. Client
> |applications can easily use threads and create multiple database connections
> |from each thread.
> |
> |A single complex and CPU-intensive query is unable to use more than one CPU to
> |do the processing for the query. The OS may still be able to use others for
> |disk I/O etc, but you won't see much benefit from more than one spare core.
>
> I think should mention that PG96 introduces parallel query.
> https://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.6/static/parallel-query.html
thats however a wiki - please get an account and assciated editor
permissions and hack away :)
Stefan
