| From: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Mark Mielke <mark(at)mark(dot)mielke(dot)cc>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, fulan Peng <fulanpeng(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] Can not create more than 32766 databases in ufs file system. |
| Date: | 2009-09-12 20:39:06 |
| Message-ID: | 20090912203906.GT17756@tamriel.snowman.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
* Tom Lane (tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us) wrote:
> I believe the filesystem limit the OP is hitting is on the number of
> *subdirectories* per directory, not on the number of plain files.
Right, I'm not entirely sure how we got onto the question of number of
tables.
> So the question I would ask goes more like "do you really need 32K
> databases in one installation? Have you considered using schemas
> instead?" Databases are, by design, pretty heavyweight objects.
I agree, but at the same time, we might: a) update our documentation to
indicate it depends on the filesystem, and b) consider how we might
work around this limit (and if we feel the effort to be worth it).
Thanks,
Stephen
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2009-09-12 22:12:09 | pgsql: Rewrite the planner's handling of materialized plan types so that |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2009-09-12 20:27:33 | Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] Can not create more than 32766 databases in ufs file system. |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Greg Smith | 2009-09-12 21:51:49 | Re: COPY enhancements |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2009-09-12 20:27:33 | Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] Can not create more than 32766 databases in ufs file system. |