Message-ID: <4666EF9D.90500@emolecules.com>
Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2007 10:32:13 -0700
From: Craig James <craig_james@emolecules.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.12 (X11/20070509)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Thousands of tables versus on table?
References: <C289C6B1.A63%tandrews@soliantconsulting.com>
	<1180980943.31471.322.camel@archimedes>
	<46645DD9.7030805@soliantconsulting.com>
	<877iqjmro5.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com>
	<46647427.4030103@g2switchworks.com>
	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0706041631490.11737@asgard.lang.hm>
	<466593E5.1010904@g2switchworks.com>
	<87sl96z0wf.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com>
	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0706051325500.24361@asgard.lang.hm>
	<10525.1181080765@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0706051507120.24361@asgard.lang.hm>
	<4666DF99.3010809@emolecules.com>
	<4666E5A0.40604@g2switchworks.com>
In-Reply-To: <4666E5A0.40604@g2switchworks.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Scott Marlowe wrote:
> OTOH, there are some things, like importing data, which are MUCH faster 
> in pgsql than in the big database.

An excellent point, I forgot about this. The COPY command is the best thing since the invention of a shirt pocket.  We have a database-per-customer design, and one of the mosterous advantages of Postgres is that we can easily do backups.  A pg_dump, then scp to a backup server, and in just a minute or two we have a full backup.  For recovery, pg_restore is equally fast and amazing.  Last time I checked, Oracle didn't have anything close to this.

Craig