Re: Overhead of tables.

On Tue, Dec 05, 2000 at 09:34:19PM -0800, some SMTP stream spewed forth:
> At 11:48 PM 12/5/2000 -0500, you wrote:
> >Soma Interesting <dfunct(at)telus(dot)net> writes:
> > > I'd like to get an idea of the overhead introduced by large quantity of
> > > tables being hosted off a single PostgreSQL server. It is possible I'll be
> > > wanting to host upwards of 200-500 tables per server. Essentially, will I
> > > be surprised to find out that performance in PostgreSQL (or DBMS in
> > > general) is significantly hindered by sheer quantity of tables?
>
> >When you get to tens of thousands of tables per server, we might start
> >to worry a little... 500 is in the "what me worry?" class.
> >
> > regards, tom lane
>
> That is what I'd expect - but I've not experienced it to really know first
> hand. Thanks for the input.
>
> If a couple more people would just say the same thing - I could rest easy
> about moving forward on this. :)

Well, based on my experience at this point, Tom Lane's
comments/suggestions are worth those of several people. Consider it as if
I have said the same as he. ;-)

gh

>