Re: One database vs. hundreds?

am  Tue, dem 28.08.2007, um 14:23:00 +0200 mailte Kamil Srot folgendes:
>
> Kynn Jones wrote:
> >I'm hoping to get some advice on a design question I'm grappling with.
> > I have a database now that in many respects may be regarded as an
> >collection of a few hundred much smaller "parallel databases", all
> >having the same schema.  What I mean by this is that, as far as the
> >intended use of this particular system there are no meaningful queries
> >whose results would include information from more than one of these
>
> I don't have experience in this type of application, but we use pgsql
> partitioning for other reasons
> and it has some of the features you want (data separation, query
> performance, ...).
> It can be worth reading:
> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.2/interactive/ddl-partitioning.html

He don't need table partitioning, this is a different thing.


Andreas
--
Andreas Kretschmer
Kontakt:  Heynitz: 035242/47150,   D1: 0160/7141639 (mehr: -> Header)
GnuPG-ID:   0x3FFF606C, privat 0x7F4584DA   http://wwwkeys.de.pgp.net