From: | "Matthias Urlichs" <smurf(at)noris(dot)de> |
---|---|
To: | Steve Wampler <swampler(at)noao(dot)edu> |
Cc: | postgres-general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Speed of locating tables? |
Date: | 2000-05-26 14:52:43 |
Message-ID: | 20000526165243.B11082@noris.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Hi,
Steve Wampler:
> So, to refine the question - given a DB with (say) 100,000
> tables, how quickly can PG access a table given its name?
>
You will then have a directory with one hundred thousand entries (plus
one for each index you decide to create). This will slow down your
system like hell.
> Thanks! I'm also open to suggestions on other ways to
> represent the data that would provide better access
> performance -
>
Easy. Every table gets another column "telescope_ID", and you create
a new table which maps from the csope's ID to their name and vice versa.
> you can probably tell I'm new to the world of databases.
You definitely want to read an introductory book / online article about
the subject.
--
Matthias Urlichs | noris network GmbH | smurf(at)noris(dot)de | ICQ: 20193661
The quote was selected randomly. Really. | http://smurf.noris.de/
--
There are those who argue that everything breaks even... I suppose
that because the rich man gets ice in the summer and the poor man
gets it in the winter things are breaking even for both.
-- Bat Masterson
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2000-05-26 14:58:59 | Re: createdb -- alternate locations |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2000-05-26 14:52:30 | Re: PG 7.0 is 2.5 times slower running a big report |