Operational performance: one big table versus many smaller tables - Mailing list pgsql-general

From David Wall
Subject Operational performance: one big table versus many smaller tables
Date
Msg-id 4AE5D275.80405@computer.org
Whole thread Raw
Responses Re: Operational performance: one big table versus many smaller tables
List pgsql-general
If I have various record types that are "one up" records that are
structurally similar (same columns) and are mostly retrieved one at a
time by its primary key, is there any performance or operational benefit
to having millions of such records split across multiple tables (say by
their application-level purpose) rather than all in one big table?

I am thinking of PG performance (handing queries against multiple tables
each with hundreds of thousands or rows, versus queries against a single
table with millions of rows), and operational performance (number of WAL
files created, pg_dump, vacuum, etc.).

If anybody has any tips, I'd much appreciate it.

Thanks,
David

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Michael Gould
Date:
Subject: Defining roles
Next
From: David Kerr
Date:
Subject: Postmaster taking 100% of the CPU