You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.
We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.
-
1"concurrent connections to a single central data store"—it doesn't need to be single, as sharding is a perfectly viable option here. Also, for example SQL Server limit in terms of concurrent connections is 32 767. Far from the "few dozen" connections you mentioned. Finally, the author never told there are 100,000 connections at the same time. It may be that there are 100,000 requests per minute (although it's not clear from the original question). If every request takes 10 ms. to process, that's 17 concurrent connections.Arseni Mourzenko– Arseni Mourzenko08/04/2025 21:54:05Commented Aug 4 at 21:54
-
@ArseniMourzenko, that's just not my experience with these things. The assumption that 100,000 requests per minute will be monotonic and evenly distributed over the entire minute is not justifiable, and a request that takes 10ms under ideal conditions might be blocked for just a second - you now have a backlog of over 1,600 concurrent connections waiting, on a system reckoned to handle just 17 at once. A server or system that has just an hour of downtime, on resuming could face 100,000 concurrent connections each maybe pushing 60 times more payload than normal.Steve– Steve08/04/2025 23:08:11Commented Aug 4 at 23:08
-
Those are indeed well known problems. Check the term "back pressure" regarding one way to solve them. In short, the side that sends data has a feedback mechanism that tells that the other side is ready to continue to receive. You will get information loss (quite expected anyway during downtime), but at least you won't crush the system that receives data.Arseni Mourzenko– Arseni Mourzenko08/05/2025 06:21:07Commented Aug 5 at 6:21
-
I agree with steve, 100k per min can be handled, but you know some customer is going to say "ok now do my 1 mil smart lightbulbs, oh and an I need per second accuracy" and its going to fall over. You need some sort of local, or near local collection and batchingEwan– Ewan08/05/2025 08:05:04Commented Aug 5 at 8:05
-
@ArseniMourzenko, I think with this, it's a case of fools rush in where angels fear to tread. It's not the laws of physics that stop these applications, it's the misapprehension of overall complexity involved, and the amount of resources and expertise available for a solution.Steve– Steve08/05/2025 13:16:15Commented Aug 5 at 13:16