From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | daleedom(at)hightowergroup(dot)com (David A(dot) Leedom) |
Cc: | pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Max Number of Databases on a Server. |
Date: | 2002-04-15 15:19:44 |
Message-ID: | 23245.1018883984@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-admin |
daleedom(at)hightowergroup(dot)com (David A. Leedom) writes:
> If I created 100 separate databases on a Linux Server would this be a
> problem? Or is the issue more related to concurrent connections?
If you're talking about multiple databases served by a single
postmaster, I don't believe it's much of an issue. You might start to
notice performance problems when you got past a few thousands, but
that'd have more to do with kernel performance (slow lookup for many
files in one directory) than Postgres itself.
Concurrent connections is a much more interesting question, but no one
can give you any interesting answers without a lot more assumptions
than "typical Linux server". How much iron is that really, and what
are your concurrent users going to be doing?
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Dmitry Tkach | 2002-04-15 17:07:20 | Alter/update large tables - VERRRY annoying behaviour! |
Previous Message | Auri Mason | 2002-04-15 13:48:28 | Re: upgrade |