Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1Xa2Sy-00039H-5D for pgsql-performance@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 03 Oct 2014 13:00:12 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with smtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1Xa2Sw-0000Fo-Ir for pgsql-performance@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 03 Oct 2014 13:00:10 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:1501:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1Xa2Sv-0000Et-Bo for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Fri, 03 Oct 2014 13:00:09 +0000 Received: from proofpoint2.mail.rice.edu ([128.42.201.101] helo=pp2.rice.edu) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1Xa2Sr-0003eA-OM for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Fri, 03 Oct 2014 13:00:07 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (pp2.rice.edu [127.0.0.1]) by pp2.rice.edu (8.14.5/8.14.5) with SMTP id s93ClZHG007114; Fri, 3 Oct 2014 08:00:04 -0500 Received: from mh10.mail.rice.edu (mh10.mail.rice.edu [128.42.201.30]) by pp2.rice.edu with ESMTP id 1psf7kg6pt-1; Fri, 03 Oct 2014 08:00:04 -0500 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavis-2.7.0 at mh10.mail.rice.edu, auth channel X-SMTP-Auth: no X-SMTP-Auth: no Received: from aart.rice.edu (aart.rice.edu [168.7.56.48]) by mh10.mail.rice.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id EAA2760554; Fri, 3 Oct 2014 08:00:03 -0500 (CDT) Received: by aart.rice.edu (Postfix, from userid 18612) id D6B491005E0; Fri, 3 Oct 2014 08:00:03 -0500 (CDT) Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2014 08:00:03 -0500 From: "ktm@rice.edu" To: Roberto Grandi Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Planning for Scalability Message-ID: <20141003130003.GN11672@aart.rice.edu> References: <1705399839.6266050.1412326345164.JavaMail.zimbra@trovaprezzi.it> <1722782443.6266128.1412326504755.JavaMail.zimbra@trovaprezzi.it> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1722782443.6266128.1412326504755.JavaMail.zimbra@trovaprezzi.it> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-12-10) X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 kscore.is_bulkscore=0 kscore.compositescore=0 circleOfTrustscore=0 compositescore=0.425252980399842 urlsuspect_oldscore=0.0553703525497916 suspectscore=0 recipient_domain_to_sender_totalscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 kscore.is_spamscore=0 recipient_to_sender_totalscore=0 recipient_domain_to_sender_domain_totalscore=0 rbsscore=0.425252980399842 spamscore=0 recipient_to_sender_domain_totalscore=0 urlsuspectscore=0.9 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=7.0.1-1402240000 definitions=main-1410030128 X-Pg-Spam-Score: -2.6 (--) List-Archive: List-Help: List-ID: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Mailing-List: pgsql-performance Precedence: bulk Sender: pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org On Fri, Oct 03, 2014 at 10:55:04AM +0200, Roberto Grandi wrote: > Dear Pg people, > > I would ask for your help considering this scaling issue. We are planning to move from 3Millions of events/day instance of postgres (8 CPU, 65 gb ram) to 5 millions of items/day. > What do you suggest in order to plan this switch? Add separate server? Increase RAM? Use SSD? > > Any real help will be really precious and appreciated. > Roberto > Hi Roberto, This change is within a factor of 2 of your existing load. I would start with analyzing the load on your existing system to determine where your bottlenecks are. 5M/day is 57/sec evenly distributed or 174/sec in an 8 hour period. This does not seems like a lot, but you have given us no details on your actual workload. Regards, Ken -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance