Received: from magus.postgresql.org (magus.postgresql.org [87.238.57.229])
	by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5206F384479
	for <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>; Thu,  8 Dec 2011 10:26:27 -0400 (AST)
Received: from nm25-vm0.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com ([98.139.213.156])
	by magus.postgresql.org with smtp (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <chestercyoung@yahoo.com>) id 1RYevX-0007eT-J6
	for pgsql-sql@postgresql.org; Thu, 08 Dec 2011 14:26:26 +0000
Received: from [98.139.215.140] by nm25.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP;
	08 Dec 2011 14:26:10 -0000
Received: from [98.139.212.204] by tm11.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP;
	08 Dec 2011 14:26:10 -0000
Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1013.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP;
	08 Dec 2011 14:26:10 -0000
X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3
X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 180500.44497.bm@omp1013.mail.bf1.yahoo.com
Received: (qmail 34197 invoked by uid 60001); 8 Dec 2011 14:26:10 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s1024;
	t=1323354370; bh=yzYGwmyL3ICRaTsCi0hHV9Vo67NYH+AJU2PuFWRleSw=;
	h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:Message-ID:Date:From:Subject:To:MIME-Version:Content-Type;
	b=sP1p4qE4ZmPSNlYbhJh9RwaZeJFt2D7slPFj9+bBaztqkXFHvK78IfFeJdgfRSbwJhEbyWigVWpKFUemJiS9FW1UkvI+1ORJCygBuMJ5KULWY9jz8tV9camQVFMimGGRbQ7sJdBrVdb3aBm9W+D9th9ebZQlv84EYcmLvYeDMlw=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com;
	h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:Message-ID:Date:From:Subject:To:MIME-Version:Content-Type;
	b=qxzg9DOh/ImH/4wKooNM6zoEBvqhSOabuMYqWHGpulSgblUau75OUyWyJqIG9E5U8uXcb26Q+hcoqrs1WZ8Yd1jzxJfqhgMVHLU9COnFwbqf93Qgvkrt9rGTaaYdXNMw1rwD2VFCdCGKNNEuEwzKRhS6a/vsCa2KGFd2A8b4QH4=;
X-YMail-OSG: MS5jR4UVM1mC89SMXkkX9MqGD8Twr0jaZe7SRTd593z9I7d
	f9EtDYX2UgkesbGyFo_VlF912_olZ.dVCAMRatIqLQXdcnGOgV.kmG6MPGj1
	VLtn4I37pyPsrv7D2lr81EXvFg8kATDUp54dspS1zb6kW4T3pSLWJ3U_fBhC
	4wSN7EEpaGNNIlJxLOfPghLOy5w2t98YwpEtB9tfyNxQKZzo2V.ORUqUoLY.
	mF0sz2_YiN4PNh52DLiGTe64MA0J49ytlo0jwIZBQQH46KwEAnETXR1aq9Ao
	e81XgJqjOcXY.73Pnk35gQxQNgP6Ccdfj6M5S3Y4a6QySXpA2dkbKfyNrtkP
	GjsjNImrfwfhZS5anflOwzhTMYAvnmPhBSOQEBfFebbP3S5PgbNn322sb3Sv
	jUWWIsD_55N_ixj7YAnBN.M4PiR2muV5pDvFbABesRCRzW8xP
Received: from [113.53.38.175] by web161406.mail.bf1.yahoo.com via HTTP;
	Thu, 08 Dec 2011 06:26:09 PST
X-Mailer: YahooMailClassic/15.0.4 YahooMailWebService/0.8.115.331698
Message-ID: <1323354369.98656.YahooMailClassic@web161406.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2011 06:26:09 -0800 (PST)
From: chester c young <chestercyoung@yahoo.com>
Subject: partitions versus databases
To: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Pg-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/)
X-Archive-Number: 201112/29
X-Sequence-Number: 36090

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.