News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Gracefully Scaling to 10k PostgreSQL Connections for $35/... by anarazel on Thursday June 21, 2018 @11:04PM (#17370972)
> Each connection even an idle one consumes roughly 10 MB of overhead

Citation needed :P

Unless you're using a large shared_buffers setting without configuring huge pages, you should see smaller overhead. Obviously depends on what you're doing in each connection - if you consider accessing 10k tables in each session part of the connection overhead, sure, it'll be bigger.

> introduces additional coordination overhead on queries.

It's not really the established connection that matters. The number of in-progress transactions matters considerably (a snapshot is O(#active-transactions)). There's some influence of the maximum number of possible connections.

Re:Gracefully Scaling to 10k PostgreSQL Connections for $35/... by jashmatthews on Friday June 22, 2018 @05:26AM (#17372641)
Production example: per-process memory usage at ChartMogul is >70MB because we use a huge number of tables with partitioning.
Re:Gracefully Scaling to 10k PostgreSQL Connections for $35/... by jpitz on Friday June 22, 2018 @09:03AM (#17373620)
> Citation needed :P

There are plenty of citations out there, but Craig wrote most of them.