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

Re: PGSQL Capacity

From: Chris Browne <cbbrowne(at)acm(dot)org>
To: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: PGSQL Capacity
Date: 2005-05-09 21:46:23
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-performance
bouchia(dot)nazha(at)free(dot)fr writes:
> How can i know a capacity of a pg database ?
> How many records my table can have ?
> I saw in a message that someone have 50 000 records it's possible in a table ?
> (My table have 8 string field (length 32 car)).
> Thanks for your response.

The capacity is much more likely to be limited by the size of the disk
drives and filesystems you have available to you than by anything

If your table consists of 8- 32 character strings, then each tuple
will consume around 256 bytes of memory, and you will be able to fit
on the order of 30 tuples into each 8K page.

By default, you can extend a single table file to up to 1GB before it
splits off to another piece.  That would mean each file can have about
3.9M tuples.  From there, you can have as many 1GB pieces as the disk
will support.  So you could have (plenty * 3.9M tuples), which could
add up to be rather large.

If you're expecting 50K records, that will be no big deal at all.
(format nil "~S(at)~S" "cbbrowne" "")
Rules of the Evil Overlord #78.  "I will not tell my Legions of Terror
"And he must  be taken alive!" The command will be:  ``And try to take
him alive if it is reasonably practical.''"

In response to

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: David RousselDate: 2005-05-09 22:38:47
Subject: Re: "Hash index" vs. "b-tree index" (PostgreSQL 8.0)
Previous:From: Joel FradkinDate: 2005-05-09 20:55:53
Subject: Configing 8 gig box.

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group