Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] Can not create more than 32766 databases in ufs file system.

Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> writes:
> * Mark Mielke (mark@mark.mielke.cc) wrote:
>> I guess I'm not seeing how using 32k tables is a sensible model.

> For one thing, there's partitioning.  For another, there's a large user
> base.  32K tables is, to be honest, not all that many, especially for
> some of these databases which reach into the multi-TB range..

I believe the filesystem limit the OP is hitting is on the number of
*subdirectories* per directory, not on the number of plain files.
If we had a hard limit at 32K tables many people would have hit it
before now.

So the question I would ask goes more like "do you really need 32K
databases in one installation?  Have you considered using schemas
instead?"  Databases are, by design, pretty heavyweight objects.
        regards, tom lane