Re: Large # of Tables, Getting ready for the enterprise - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Large # of Tables, Getting ready for the enterprise
Date
Msg-id 22053.966661381@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Large # of Tables, Getting ready for the enterprise  ("carl garland" <carlhgarland@hotmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
"carl garland" <carlhgarland@hotmail.com> writes:
> Currently postgres will support an incredible amount of tables whereas
> Interbase only supports 64K, but the efficiency and performance of the
> pg backend quickly degenerates after 1000 tables.

Current sources fix some problems with large numbers of indexes
(pg_index was being sequentially scanned in several places).  Offhand
I'm not aware of any other significant real-world performance problems
in this area; can you be more specific about what's bothering you?
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Functions and Null Values
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_attribute growing and growing and growing