On Monday 23 June 2008 15:45:22 Kynn Jones wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 2:21 PM, Steve Atkins <steve@blighty.com> wrote:
> > In real use you're unlikely to hit any limits, theoretical or practical,
> > but if you start to use a silly number of tables and so on you're likely
> > to hit performance issues eventually. I'm not sure where that threshold
> > would be, but it's higher than "thousands".
>
> Actually, the DB I have in mind would certainly be approaching "silly
> territory." I'm looking at a schema with around 10 thousand tables (or
> views). Unfortunately, as far as I can tell,
> http://www.postgresql.org/about/ says nothing about maximum number of
> tables. I suppose I could always find what this limit is "the hard way",
> by writing a script that just keeps creating empty tables and see where
> that goes, but I'd prefer not to do something like this...
>
http://people.planetpostgresql.org/greg/index.php?/archives/37-The-million-table-challenge.html
--
Robert Treat
Build A Brighter LAMP :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
