pg.ddx.io  pgsql-performance@postgresql.org mailing list archive  
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Divakar Singh <dpsmails@yahoo.com>
To: tv@fuzzy.cz, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: tv@fuzzy.cz
Subject: Re: Which gives good performance? separate database vs separate schema
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2010 06:53:40 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <561635.22935.qm@web65413.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9e934a9fa3759396caaec2c3974af5d6.squirrel@sq.gransy.com>
References: <991565.83793.qm@web65414.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
	<d0ba0839bcf4b41b456ec741f705e9bb.squirrel@sq.gransy.com>
	<201011251310.17080.andres@anarazel.de>
	<9e934a9fa3759396caaec2c3974af5d6.squirrel@sq.gransy.com>

I am not facing any issues, but yes I want to have optimal performance for 
SELECT and INSERT, especially when I am doing these ops repeatedly.
Actually I am porting from Oracle to PG. Oracle starts a lot of processes when 
it needs to run many schemas. I do not think PG would need much more resources 
(mem, cpu) if I go for different database for each process..? Also, is there any 
limit on number of databases I can start using a PG server? 


 Best Regards,
Divakar




________________________________
From: "tv@fuzzy.cz" <tv@fuzzy.cz>
To: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; tv@fuzzy.cz; Divakar Singh 
<dpsmails@yahoo.com>
Sent: Thu, November 25, 2010 5:55:33 PM
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Which gives good performance? separate database vs 
separate schema

> On Thursday 25 November 2010 13:02:08 tv@fuzzy.cz wrote:
>> I don't think you'll get performance improvement from running two
>> PostgreSQL clusters (one for DB1, one for DB2). And when running two
>> databases within the same cluster, there's no measurable performance
>> difference AFAIK.
> That one is definitely not true in many circumstances. As soon as you
> start to
> hit contention (shared memory, locks) you may very well be better of with
> two
> separate clusters.
>
> Andres
>
Good point, I forgot about that. Anyway it's hard to predict what kind of
performance issue he's facing and whether two clusters would fix it.

regards
Tomas


-- 
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance



      

view thread (9+ messages)  latest in thread

Message-ID: <561635.22935.qm@web65413.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
Permalink:  ../561635.22935.qm@web65413.mail.ac4.yahoo.com/
Also on:    postgresql.org/message-id/561635.22935.qm@web65413.mail.ac4.yahoo.com

 · 

reply

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-performance@postgresql.org
  Cc: dpsmails@yahoo.com, andres@anarazel.de, tv@fuzzy.cz
  Subject: Re: Which gives good performance? separate database vs separate schema
  In-Reply-To: <561635.22935.qm@web65413.mail.ac4.yahoo.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