Community Tip - Want the oppurtunity to discuss enhancements to PTC products? Join a working group! X
I'm trying to research whether it is possible for ThingWorx 8 to function on a server given it has 2 CPU cores for utilization.
The difficult part is that I'm not sure about the number of devices or data frequency yet, but I don't think we will have very many (I estimate <1000). I know the installation documentation recommends a minimum of 4 CPU cores. I would like to know if anyone has tested a 2 core utilization or has performance statistics that would help reason for or against this.
Hello, Aaron.
I know it's possible to run ThingWorx 8 on a 2-core system; I have test platforms that do this. Whether this is suitable for a Production environment, I certainly wouldn't recommend it. Which persistence provider are you thinking of using? If PostgreSql or MS SQL Server, you'd certainly want to run those on a different server.
Here is the ThingWorx Sizing Guide for 7.x; it will point out parameters you can consider and measure if you want to give it a tryout.
http://support.ptc.com/WCMS/files/172249/en/ThingWorx_Core_7.x_Sizing_Guide.pdf
Let me know if you have any additional questions.
-- Craig A.
Thank you for the reply.
At first we will only have a few things connected. We plan to use PostgreSQL for persistence, and KEPWare will also be involved.
We will probably be moving to a 4 core setup later on. Would you consider the 2 core setup to be usable? Does it bog down a lot? How does the Composer fare?
Hi, Aaron.
Again, I've only used a 2-core system in a local VM in a lightweight, test/debug/troubleshoot only kind of scenario. I can't say much at all about how it would hold up under your projected load.
The two recommendations I can think of are to put postgres on a separate server, and pilot test this in as close to your actual use case as you can before attempting to put into production, just to be sure.
-- Craig A.