Re: Tablespace size in TB

From: Thiemo Kellner <thiemo(at)gelassene-pferde(dot)biz>
To: pgsql-general <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Tablespace size in TB
Date: 2026-05-03 19:38:59
Message-ID: cf577ffe-2d88-4647-a873-5301fbb28ff7@gelassene-pferde.biz
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Even with Oracle you need to know the architecture of your storage to decide whether you can expect performance improvements. If you happen to have some kind of NAS, you partitions for the different table spaces might reside on the very same hardware and you probably gain naught.

03.05.2026 14:27:01 masheed ullah <masheedullah(at)gmail(dot)com>:

> Just to check like Oracle, parallelism works well with multiple tablespaces.
> Moving tables/ indexes to multiple tablespaces to use the parallelism to boost the backup speed. With a single tablespace, parallelism will not work.
>
> On Sun, May 3, 2026 at 3:21 PM Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at> wrote:
>> On Sun, 2026-05-03 at 14:10 +0200, Jan Karremans wrote:
>>> Contrary to Oracle, a table space in PostgreSQL is a directory. And not a logical abstraction.
>>> Moving tables from one table space to another becomes so much easier by that.
>>
>> I am confused.  Yes, if you have more than a single (default) tablespace,
>> moving tables between tablespaces becomes possible and hence easier.
>> But why would you want to move tables between tablespaces in the first place?
>>
>> Yours,
>> Laurenz Albe
>
>
>

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Igor Korot 2026-05-03 19:52:18 Choosing default collation/ctype
Previous Message Christophe Pettus 2026-05-03 17:07:26 Re: Tablespace size in TB