Re: Inefficient escape codes.
От | Rodrigo Madera |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Inefficient escape codes. |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 3cf983d0510250903l6eb5b3dfsda46190f3e7fd289@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Inefficient escape codes. (Rodrigo Madera <rodrigo.madera@gmail.com>) |
Список | pgsql-performance |
Ok, thanks for the limits info, but I have that in the manual. Thanks.
But what I really want to know is this:
1) All large objects of all tables inside one DATABASE is kept on only one table. True or false?
Thanks =o)
Rodrigo
But what I really want to know is this:
1) All large objects of all tables inside one DATABASE is kept on only one table. True or false?
Thanks =o)
Rodrigo
On 10/25/05, Nörder-Tuitje, Marcus <noerder-tuitje@technology.de> wrote:
oh, btw, no harm, but :having 5000 tables only to gain access via city name is a major design flaw.you might consider putting all into one table working with a distributed index over yer table (city, loc_texdt, blobfield); creating a partitioned index over city.best regards-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----Now this interests me a lot.
Von: pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org [mailto:pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org]Im Auftrag von Rodrigo Madera
Gesendet: Montag, 24. Oktober 2005 21:12
An: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Betreff: Re: [PERFORM] Inefficient escape codes.
Please clarify this:
I have 5000 tables, one for each city:
City1_Photos, City2_Photos, ... City5000_Photos.
Each of these tables are: CREATE TABLE CityN_Photos (location text, lo_id largeobectypeiforgot)
So, what's the limit for these large objects? I heard I could only have 4 billion records for the whole database (not for each table). Is this true? If this isn't true, then would postgres manage to create all the large objects I ask him to?
Also, this would be a performance penalty, wouldn't it?
Much thanks for the knowledge shared,
Rodrigo
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: