From: | "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Steve Manes <smanes(at)magpie(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Maximum # of schemas |
Date: | 2005-10-04 13:51:45 |
Message-ID: | 20051004135145.GY40138@pervasive.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Sun, Oct 02, 2005 at 11:27:29AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Steve Manes <smanes(at)magpie(dot)com> writes:
> > Questions: is there a hard limit to the number of schemas you could have
> > in a database?
>
> No.
>
> > Are there any caveats/pitfalls/pitbulls to having a
> > large number of duplicate schemas in a database?
>
> If that also implies a large number of tables, you might start to run
> into filesystem-level bottlenecks due to having a large number of files
> in the same directory. If you aren't using a filesystem that copes
> gracefully with huge directories, you probably want to avoid having more
> than a few thousand files per directory. (As of PG 8.0 you can work
> around this to some extent by segregating tables into different
> tablespaces.)
Some of the "\ commands" in psql will also get slow. I've seen this for
a database with 4000 tables.
--
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com
Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117
vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | han.holl | 2005-10-04 14:01:40 | Avoiding evaluating functions twice. |
Previous Message | Jim C. Nasby | 2005-10-04 13:40:36 | Re: Get all table names that have a specific column |