Postgresql capabilities question

From: "John Wells" <jb(at)sourceillustrated(dot)com>
To: <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>, <ale(at)ale(dot)org>
Subject: Postgresql capabilities question
Date: 2003-04-03 00:33:46
Message-ID: 34044.172.16.2.4.1049330026.squirrel@192.168.2.4
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

I have a M$ Sql Server db that I'm porting to postgresql. Approx. 24
tables from this old db can be combined in the new database into one
table, and it would be a bit more elegant to do this.

However, the combined table would be around 95000 rows in size.

Having never really used Postgresql in the past, and unable to find a
datapoint on the web, I would really like to get input from current users.
Is this an unreasonable table size to expect good performance when the
PHP app driving it gets a reasonable amount of traffic? I know
performance is also heavily dependent on indexes and query structure, but
disregarding either of those for the sake of argument, would I be better
off keeping the tables separate, or is 95000 not something to worry about?
btw, most tables in this database are quite small (<2000). My redesign
would create two tables in the +90000 range, but less than 100000.

Thanks very much for your input.

John

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David Wheeler 2003-04-03 00:37:01 ANNOUNCE: Bricolage-Devel 1.5.2
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2003-04-02 23:21:55 Re: Backend often crashing