Re: Massive Number of Concurrent Users

  • From: Dave <user4test@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: Niall Litchfield <niall.litchfield@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2012 12:12:29 -0600

Hi Niall,
The overall number of users is in the hundreds of thousands with the
projected maximum peak concurrent (meaning simultaneously connected)
equalling 5,000.  It's basically a daily use application for processing
orders and reports.

On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Niall Litchfield <
niall.litchfield@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> What sort of application is it, and what is the definition of concurrent
> users? You put an upper bound of 5000 on this figure. If this means
> 'concurrently connected' and this is real OLTP then I'd use 10% of that as
> an active workload or 500 active user processes. That doesn't equate to
> huge hardware demands, in fact and especially if workload can be segregated
> would probably make an excellent 3 node 4 proc RAC install on intel. If
> 5000 concurrent users means 5000 concurrently active sessions (say 50000
> users for OLTP) then we're beyond mailing list advice IMO. Mixed mode
> OLTP/DSS apps (what I call Real Applications!) are also heavily dependent
> on actual usage patterns for analysis. You likely also want to read Neil
> Gunther's Universal Scalability Law  as well IMO
> On Jun 8, 2012 5:56 PM, "Dave" <user4test@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Just wondering if anyone on the list who has worked with a concurrent peak
>> user load in the thousands (1000 - 5000) would mind sharing some nuggets
>> on
>> the hardware they used to support such a load.  The load would come from
>> an
>> OLTP (80/20 r/w) web application using JBOSS application pools to the
>> Oracle 11gR2 Ent database.  I've been doing some research looking at
>> powerful systems capable of supporting 80 Intel cores per system and
>> connecting that with some PCIe Flash Memory for the L2 cache (flash cache)
>> as well as using shared storage into a RamSan-630 via FC in order to
>> maximize the use of the CPU cores and fast I/O.  This would likely be a
>> RAC
>> scenario with two like servers.  By the way, I am aware of how relatively
>> "cheap" (cough) the hardware is compared to the millions in Oracle
>> licensing this will cost.  Still, I suspect the entire thing will be
>> cheaper overall than an Exadata x2-8 system.
>> Thanks!
>> --


Other related posts: