Re: pg_shadow overusage
От | Rod Taylor |
---|---|
Тема | Re: pg_shadow overusage |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 059b01c08af7$5f5e61b0$2205010a@jester обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | pg_shadow overusage ("Rod Taylor" <rod.taylor@inquent.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
My mistake. The index on pg_shadow breaks nearly everything. I can have triggers maintain this effectively enough for my needs however. However, whether or not the number of users I want to add is going to be too much is still a question. -- Rod Taylor There are always four sides to every story: your side, their side, the truth, and what really happened. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rod Taylor" <rod.taylor@inquent.com> To: "Hackers List" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org> Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2001 2:24 PM Subject: [HACKERS] pg_shadow overusage > I'd like to keep a complete history of everything that users of the > system does from the database level (as there are a number of > applications, and backend workers). I've done this through various > rules, triggers. > > The next step is to try to tie a name to it. getpgusername() supplies > that perfectly. The real question is, how many users can be in > pg_shadow without the system thrashing. > > We're looking to start with approx. 20 000, and will likely grow that > number to 100k users in a years time (I understand a goal for 7.2 is > to get rid of the OID limit :). > > Will pg_shadow and the database in general barf with that number of > users in the database? A limit of 40 simultaneous connections should > suffice for our needs as user sessions will be quite short. > > I also want to FOREIGN KEY the usename column in pg_shadow, I'll > assume that adding a unique index won't hurt anything (as I've not > noticed any problems on the test system thus far). > > Thanks for any input. > > -- > Rod Taylor > > There are always four sides to every story: your side, their side, the > truth, and what really happened. >
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: