Back to News
Advertisement
Advertisement

⚡ Community Insights

Discussion Sentiment

0% Positive

Analyzed from 126 words in the discussion.

Trending Topics

#connections#postgres#connection#incoming#beyond#load#large#don#scale#running

Discussion (7 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews

sgarlandabout 1 hour ago
How people are running any RDBMS in prod — but especially Postgres - and not using a connection pooler with the capability to pause incoming connections is beyond me.

The entire “how do we drain connections” issue described in TFA becomes trivial, as does gradually raising the amount of incoming connections, let alone the load advantages from multiplexing the client connections.

d4v3about 2 hours ago
Separate high-frequency operational state from large, flexible, searchable metadata. It is bad data models that don't scale
CubsFan1060about 1 hour ago
15,000 database connections seems like a lot. Is that a scale Postgres supports very well?
jbonatakis25 minutes ago
That’s well beyond what a stock Postgres server would reasonably handle
hylarideabout 1 hour ago
> with an unusually large load we surpassed our provisioned IO on the underlying volume

Sounds like they could have benefitted from Aurora's storage model (though there are reasons not to use it, too).

nosefrog38 minutes ago
Don't reboot the db during your next outage.
tony_cannistraabout 1 hour ago
Yeah. This is why we have connection pooling.