Stephen Frost <sfr...@snowman.net> writes: > * Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote: >> So, that's really the core of your problem. We don't promise that >> you can run several thousand backends at once. Usually it's recommended >> that you stick a connection pooler in front of a server with (at most) >> a few hundred backends.
> Sure, but that doesn't mean things should completely fall over when we > do get up to larger numbers of backends, which is definitely pretty > common in larger systems. As I understood the report, it was not "things completely fall over", it was "performance gets bad". But let's get real. Unless the OP has a machine with thousands of CPUs, trying to run this way is counterproductive. Perhaps in a decade or two such machines will be common enough that it'll make sense to try to tune Postgres to run well on them. Right now I feel no hesitation about saying "if it hurts, don't do that". regards, tom lane