Re: Experience with large number of tables in single PostgreSQL instance

Every table or index is created in the form of OS files therefore max open
files need to be set appropriately in order to achieve the larger table
count. There would be no limitation for creation of tables in PostgreSQL
and performance would be the major criteria as catalogs get overburdened.

**
*Thanks & Regards,*
*** *
*Prashanth Ranjalkar*
*Database Consultant & Architect*
*Skype:prashanth.ranjalkar*
*www.postgresdba.net*

On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 2:13 PM, Dale Betts <dale(dot)betts(at)hssnet(dot)com> wrote:

> I'd agree, certainly in my experiences.
>
> You need to ensure OS parameters such as the max open files (fs.file-max
> if we're talking Linux) is set appropriately. Baring in mind each user will
> have an open file on each underlying datafile for the databases they're
> connected to.
>
> Dale
> Dale Betts
> Technical Specialist
> T 01623 48 98 22
> F 01623 48 98 20
> e dale(dot)betts(at)hssnet(dot)com
> Sales www.hssnet.com <http:%5C%5Cwww.hssnet.com>
> Healthcare Software Systems
> 3rd Floor i2 Mansfield
> Hamilton Court
> Oakham Business Park
> Mansfield
> NG18 5FB
> THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS MESSAGE IS CONFIDENTIAL and is
> intended for the addressee only. If you are not the addressee, any
> disclosure, reproduction, copying, distribution, or other dissemination or
> use of this communication is strictly prohibited. Any views or opinions
> presented are those of the sender and do not necessarily represent
> Healthcare Software Systems.
>
> HSS Ltd is a company registered in England and Wales with company number
> 2112370
> On 10/04/2013 08:24, Vasilis Ventirozos wrote:
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 10:10 AM, Vedran Krivokuca <vkrivokuca(at)gmail(dot)com>wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 9:07 AM, Vedran Krivokuca <vkrivokuca(at)gmail(dot)com>
>> wrote:
>> > 1) we can go with different instances of PostgreSQL service, let's say
>> > (for pure theory) 10 of them on the same HA cluster setup. Every
>> > instance would hold let's say 1/10th of that big recordset, and around
>> > 3.000 database tables (this apparently shouldn't be of any problem to
>> > PostgreSQL, see below).
>>
>> I am talking shit here, obviously, excuse me. We would go with, for
>> example, 10 or 100 databases in the same PostgreSQL instance.
>> Buzzwording got better of me. :) The rest of my initial e-mail still
>> applies, I will cherish any input of experience on this subject.
>>
>>
>> V.
>>
>> --
>> Pozdrav/Greetings,
>> Vedran Krivokuća
>> Disclaimer: This message may contain information.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Sent via pgsql-admin mailing list (pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org)
>> To make changes to your subscription:
>> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-admin
>>
>
> I think that a limitation would be on the OS (filesystem and kernel) because each table
> is a file (or more) under a directory (per database). I haven't got experience on how
>
> modern Linux system cope with that but i think it would be something easy to test.
> Database wise you shouldn't have a problem.
>
>
>
>