Re: 15,000 tables
От | Alex Stapleton |
---|---|
Тема | Re: 15,000 tables |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 57292C7A-8300-4CD4-BF1E-62190D36A549@advfn.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: 15,000 tables (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: 15,000 tables
|
Список | pgsql-performance |
On 1 Dec 2005, at 16:03, Tom Lane wrote: > Michael Riess <mlriess@gmx.de> writes: >> (We NEED that many tables, please don't recommend to reduce them) > > No, you don't. Add an additional key column to fold together > different > tables of the same structure. This will be much more efficient than > managing that key at the filesystem level, which is what you're > effectively doing now. > > (If you really have 15000 distinct rowtypes, I'd like to know what > your database design is...) > Won't you end up with awful seek times if you just want data which previously been stored in a single table? E.g. whilst before you wanted 1000 contiguous rows from the table, now you want 1000 rows which now have 1000 rows you don't care about in between each one you do want.
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: