From: | "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Just Someone <just(dot)some(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Practical limit on number of tables ina single database |
Date: | 2006-03-24 12:40:25 |
Message-ID: | 20060324124024.GA90527@pervasive.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Fri, Mar 24, 2006 at 02:33:39AM -0800, Just Someone wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am creating a hosted solution that I want to base on separation by
> schemas. So that each hosted family we will have, will have a schema
> assigned to it (and a user). On login I will set the search path, and
> so each family will see it's tables. This is all tested and works
> fine.
>
> But I would like to know if there's a practical limit to the number of
> schemas and tables I can have. Please note that I'm using table spaces
> to make sure the directories are manageable.
>
> I tested it so far with 13000 schemas and users, with 26 tables in
> each schema (a total of more that 330000 tables). It works perfectly,
> but I would like to know if someone has experience with this number of
> tables/schemas, and if there's a limit I should be careful of.
Just make sure you increase max_fsm_relations, and that max_fsm_pages is
at least > max_fsm_relations, because each relation must get at least
one page.
--
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 | joseph | 2006-03-24 13:27:06 | another seemingly simple encoding question |
Previous Message | Jim C. Nasby | 2006-03-24 12:34:53 | Re: Parallel sequential scans |