Message-ID: <d0ba0839bcf4b41b456ec741f705e9bb.squirrel@sq.gransy.com>
In-Reply-To: <991565.83793.qm@web65414.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
References: <991565.83793.qm@web65414.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2010 13:02:08 +0100
Subject: Re: Which gives good performance? separate database vs separate
 schema
From: tv@fuzzy.cz
To: "Divakar Singh" <dpsmails@yahoo.com>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.21
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Importance: Normal

Hello,

> Now, should I put these tables in 1 Database's different schemas or in
> separate
> databases itself for good performance?
> I am using libpq for connection.
>
> Pictorial Representation:
>
> Process1 -> DB1.schema1.table1
>
> Process2 -> DB1.schema2.table1
>
>   Vs.
>
> Process1 -> DB1.default.table1
>
> Process2 -> DB2.default.table1
>
> Which one is better?

Well, that depends on what you mean by "database." In many other products
each database is completely separate (with it's own cache, processes etc).
In PostgreSQL, there's a cluster of databases, and all of them share the
same cache (shared buffers) etc.

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.

So the two options are exactly the same.

Tomas