On 4/29/2010 11:49 AM, Ozz Nixon wrote:
> On 4/29/10 12:42 PM, Greg Smith wrote:
>> Alban Hertroys wrote:
>>> The reason I'm asking is that Postgres doesn't perform at its best on
>>> Windows and I seriously wonder whether the OS would be able to handle
>>> a load like that at all (can Windows handle 4000 open sockets for
>>> example?).
>>
>> You have to go out of your way to even get >125 connections going on
>> Windows; see the very last entry at
>>
>> http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Running_%26_Installing_PostgreSQL_On_Native_Windows
>>
>>
> I design socket component suites for developers, on windows, with few
> registry tweaks, you are able to have over 50,000 live, hot sockets.
I dont think its that easy. 50,000 sockets open, sure, but whats the
performance? The programming model has everything to do with that, and
windows select() wont support that many sockets with any sort of
performance. For windows you have to convert to using non-blocking
sockets w/messages. (and I've never see the PG code, but I'll bet it's
not using non-blocking sockets & windows msg q, so 50k sockets using
select() on windows will not be usable).
That being said, I'm not a windows socket component developer, so its
mostly guessing. But saying "it can" and saying "its usable" are two
different things, and that depends on the code, not the registry settings.
-Andy