Re: Which gives good performance? separate database vs separate schema

I am not facing any issues, but yes I want to have optimal performance for
SELECT and INSERT, especially when I am doing these ops repeatedly.
Actually I am porting from Oracle to PG. Oracle starts a lot of processes when
it needs to run many schemas. I do not think PG would need much more resources
(mem, cpu) if I go for different database for each process..? Also, is there any
limit on number of databases I can start using a PG server?

Best Regards,
Divakar

________________________________
From: "tv(at)fuzzy(dot)cz" <tv(at)fuzzy(dot)cz>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org; tv(at)fuzzy(dot)cz; Divakar Singh
<dpsmails(at)yahoo(dot)com>
Sent: Thu, November 25, 2010 5:55:33 PM
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Which gives good performance? separate database vs
separate schema

> On Thursday 25 November 2010 13:02:08 tv(at)fuzzy(dot)cz wrote:
>> I don't think you'll get performance improvement from running two
>> PostgreSQL clusters (one for DB1, one for DB2). And when running two
>> databases within the same cluster, there's no measurable performance
>> difference AFAIK.
> That one is definitely not true in many circumstances. As soon as you
> start to
> hit contention (shared memory, locks) you may very well be better of with
> two
> separate clusters.
>
> Andres
>
Good point, I forgot about that. Anyway it's hard to predict what kind of
performance issue he's facing and whether two clusters would fix it.

regards
Tomas