Re: 15,000 tables

Hi,

> On 12/1/05, Michael Riess <mlriess(at)gmx(dot)de> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> we are currently running a postgres server (upgraded to 8.1) which has
>> one large database with approx. 15,000 tables. Unfortunately performance
>> suffers from that, because the internal tables (especially that which
>> holds the attribute info) get too large.
>>
>> (We NEED that many tables, please don't recommend to reduce them)
>>
>
> Have you ANALYZEd your database? VACUUMing?

Of course ... before 8.1 we routinely did a vacuum full analyze each
night. As of 8.1 we use autovacuum.

>
> BTW, are you using some kind of weird ERP? I have one that treat
> informix as a fool and don't let me get all of informix potential...
> maybe the same is in your case...

No. Our database contains tables for we content management systems. The
server hosts approx. 500 cms applications, and each of them has approx.
30 tables.

That's why I'm asking if it was better to have 500 databases with 30
tables each. In previous Postgres versions this led to even worse
performance ...

Mike