Re: Partitioning Vs. Split Databases - performance?

> > > 3) Put each customer in their own schema/namespace which resides within
> > > its own table space.
> > >
> > > Then you can move customers wherever you need in terms of IO.
> 
> How is that functionally different than using a separate database? What's the 
> advantage here? I don't *need* to restrict myself to one database, and doing 
> this does require that I revisit 100% of the SQL queries to make sure that 
> I'm referencing the right schema. 
> 
> This solution seems to have the same problems as using dynamic tablenames. 

Not really. You should read up on schemas and how they work. Plus the
addition of schemas and table spaces means you can infinite scaling
within the confines of your hardware itself.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

-- 

      === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive  PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
             http://www.commandprompt.com/

Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate