zlacker

[parent] [thread] 5 comments
1. SahAss+(OP)[view] [source] 2021-12-18 01:14:52
I assume that is their main database for everything, not just for pub/sub. One of the big benefits of doing it that way is that you have proper transaction handling across jobs and their related data.
replies(1): >>jbvers+97
◧
2. jbvers+97[view] [source] 2021-12-18 02:18:34
>>SahAss+(OP)
Come on man… you can run the whole thing off if a few Gb instance. Such a huge instance should be able to do about 100k a second!
replies(4): >>anifor+Gf >>stilli+6n >>akvadr+IE >>michae+Lc2
◧◩
3. anifor+Gf[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-12-18 03:47:46
>>jbvers+97
Potential and actual usage aren't related. They might be having a lot of records and read/writes but maybe the actual pub/sub isn't that intensive. They seem to be using the same DB for everything
◧◩
4. stilli+6n[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-12-18 05:13:51
>>jbvers+97
Be careful not to confuse average load with peak instantaneous load. Bursty workloads are the bane of capacity planners everywhere.
◧◩
5. akvadr+IE[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-12-18 08:52:49
>>jbvers+97
Does postgres scale that well? I would be interested in case studies as I've not seen much achieving beyond 10k records per second.
◧◩
6. michae+Lc2[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-12-18 21:54:53
>>jbvers+97
Whose to say it can't?
[go to top]