Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] Can not create more than 32766 databases in ufs file system.

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Mark Mielke <mark(at)mark(dot)mielke(dot)cc>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, fulan Peng <fulanpeng(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] Can not create more than 32766 databases in ufs file system.
Date: 2009-09-12 23:30:09
Message-ID: 4AAC2F01.3020803@dunslane.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:
> So the question I would ask goes more like "do you really need 32K
> databases in one installation? Have you considered using schemas
> instead?" Databases are, by design, pretty heavyweight objects.
>
>
>

That's a fair question. OTOH, devising a scheme to get around it would
not be terribly difficult, would it? I can imagine a scheme where the
subdir for a database was lo/hi for some division of the database oid. I
guess it could make matters ugly for pg_migrator, though.

cheers

andrew

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-committers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2009-09-13 01:34:09 Re: pgsql: Add Unicode support in PL/Python PL/Python now accepts Unicode
Previous Message Joe Conway 2009-09-12 23:21:13 pgsql: plug dblink resource leak dblink generates orphaned connections

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2009-09-13 01:34:09 Re: pgsql: Add Unicode support in PL/Python PL/Python now accepts Unicode
Previous Message Mark Mielke 2009-09-12 23:12:05 Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] Can not create more than 32766 databases in ufs file system.