From: chester c young <chestercyoung@yahoo.com>
To: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Subject: partitions versus databases
Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2011 06:26:09 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <1323354369.98656.YahooMailClassic@web161406.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> (raw)
have an db with about 15 tables that will handle many companies. no data overlap between companies. is it more efficient run-time to use one database and index each row by company id, and one database and partition each table by company id, or to create a database for each company?
it is a web-based app using persistent connections. no copying.
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-sql@postgresql.org
Cc: chestercyoung@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: partitions versus databases
In-Reply-To: <1323354369.98656.YahooMailClassic@web161406.mail.bf1.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