Re: Partitioning Vs. Split Databases - performance?

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 12/21/06 16:41, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>>>> 3) Put each customer in their own schema/namespace which resides within
>>>> its own table space.
>>>>
>>>> Then you can move customers wherever you need in terms of IO.
>> How is that functionally different than using a separate database? What's the
>> advantage here? I don't *need* to restrict myself to one database, and doing
>> this does require that I revisit 100% of the SQL queries to make sure that
>> I'm referencing the right schema.
>>
>> This solution seems to have the same problems as using dynamic tablenames.
>
> Not really. You should read up on schemas and how they work. Plus the
> addition of schemas and table spaces means you can infinite scaling
> within the confines of your hardware itself.

"infinite scaling within the confines of your hardware"!

How is that accomplished?

- --
Ron Johnson, Jr.
Jefferson LA USA

Is "common sense" really valid?
For example, it is "common sense" to white-power racists that
whites are superior to blacks, and that those with brown skins
are mud people.
However, that "common sense" is obviously wrong.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFFixCWS9HxQb37XmcRAnw/AJ4obPHIHvJcRKq1xzILN7YtKfQscACg1uaq
c6FRxkXjP/Pneyy1lxA+Dl8=
=iFX6
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----