Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Very Large Table Partitioning

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Majid Azimi <majid(dot)merkava(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL - Novice <pgsql-novice(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Very Large Table Partitioning
Date: 2010-12-17 19:38:49
Message-ID: 4393.1292614729@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-novice
Majid Azimi <majid(dot)merkava(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> if we decide to partition table per user we have lots of tables (maybe 
> more than 100000+) with only 10000 records each.
> is this a good idea? is there any limit for number of tables?

No, it's a fantastically bad idea.  Please note the caveats in the
partitioning documentation --- the facility is not meant for more than
order-of-a-hundred partitions.  Even if Postgres didn't have issues with
it, your filesystem might get ill with hundreds of thousands of files in
one directory.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-novice by date

Next:From: Mladen GogalaDate: 2010-12-17 22:26:28
Subject: Re: Very Large Table Partitioning
Previous:From: Majid AzimiDate: 2010-12-17 18:58:30
Subject: Very Large Table Partitioning

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group