pg.ddx.io pgsql-admin@postgresql.org mailing list archive
help / color / mirror / Atom feedLarge Number Of Sequences in Database
2+ messages / 2 participants
[nested] [flat]
* Large Number Of Sequences in Database
@ 2016-07-21 20:32 Jorge Torralba <jorge.torralba@gmail.com>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Jorge Torralba @ 2016-07-21 20:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-admin
Doing some forensic work on a Postgres 9.5 database that is in testing with
only 19 relations and over 100,000 sequences. Once this database goes live,
it could see in excess of 1 Million sequences created due to the complexity
of the application. There are obvious risks such as pg_dump issues and slow
response when scanning catalog table for info. But, are there any serious
issues that can show up from this situation? I know theoretically, postgres
can have unlimited tables in a database. But, I am looking for some
realistic worse case scenarios in an environment like the one described.
--
Thanks,
Jorge Torralba
----------------------------
Note: This communication may contain privileged or other confidential
information. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not print,
copy, retransmit, disseminate or otherwise use the information. Please
indicate to the sender that you have received this email in error and
delete the copy you received. Thank You.
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 2+ messages in thread
* Re: Large Number Of Sequences in Database
@ 2016-07-21 20:44 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
parent: Jorge Torralba <jorge.torralba@gmail.com>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Tom Lane @ 2016-07-21 20:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jorge Torralba <jorge.torralba@gmail.com>; +Cc: pgsql-admin
Jorge Torralba <jorge.torralba@gmail.com> writes:
> Doing some forensic work on a Postgres 9.5 database that is in testing with
> only 19 relations and over 100,000 sequences. Once this database goes live,
> it could see in excess of 1 Million sequences created due to the complexity
> of the application. There are obvious risks such as pg_dump issues and slow
> response when scanning catalog table for info. But, are there any serious
> issues that can show up from this situation? I know theoretically, postgres
> can have unlimited tables in a database. But, I am looking for some
> realistic worse case scenarios in an environment like the one described.
Reminds me of this talk:
http://www.pgcon.org/2013/schedule/events/595.en.html
1M tables is a lot short of 1B, but still you'll start running into some
of the same issues Alvaro described. Personally I'd look for another way
to do it.
(We've occasionally batted around the idea of merging all sequences into
one catalog, which would help a lot; but the compatibility breakage that
would ensue is a bit daunting.)
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-admin mailing list (pgsql-admin@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-admin
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2016-07-21 20:44 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox mbox.gz follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2016-07-21 20:32 Large Number Of Sequences in Database Jorge Torralba <jorge.torralba@gmail.com>
2016-07-21 20:44 ` Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox