From: Dale Betts <dale.betts@hssnet.com>
To: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Experience with large number of tables in single PostgreSQL instance
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2013 09:43:10 +0100
Message-ID: <5165261E.4050207@hssnet.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAF8jcqp-XZJX7WLNYQ4+zhpTr4Db3GhKs=MrUSgF61MgbjO2bQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAP+XhHu0V1-cUs5+Zcb7htaiG9HX0_Yvr=iWE1NGoeCece2gvQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CAP+XhHsry4DinX+2eNSdrgD2NLpV8tHpJoC8rDTPQ7gqMYxnWQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CAF8jcqp-XZJX7WLNYQ4+zhpTr4Db3GhKs=MrUSgF61MgbjO2bQ@mail.gmail.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-admin>
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.betts@hssnet.com <mailto:dale.betts@hssnet.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@gmail.com <mailto:vkrivokuca@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 9:07 AM, Vedran Krivokuca
> <vkrivokuca@gmail.com <mailto:vkrivokuca@gmail.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@postgresql.org
> <mailto:pgsql-admin@postgresql.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.
>
Attachments:HSS_vs.gif (image/gif, 3.8K) downloadview imageoca4.gif (image/gif, 3.0K) downloadview image
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org
Cc: dale.betts@hssnet.com
Subject: Re: Experience with large number of tables in single PostgreSQL instance
In-Reply-To: <5165261E.4050207@hssnet.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
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