List:General Discussion« Previous MessageNext Message »
From:Michael Widenius Date:June 5 1999 12:05pm
Subject:Re: Multiple Database Performance
View as plain text  
>>>>> "Sasha" == Sasha Pachev <sasha@stripped> writes:

Sasha> Eric Savage wrote:
>> 
>> We are updating our messaging system, and I had a question.  In order to
>> speed lookups, we are thinking of limiting tables sizes, say having 1000
>> users per table.  It would be easiest if we built indentically structured
>> databases, so the querys can use the same syntax and table names.  We
>> would then have 1000 users per database, and one master database with
>> routing information. Is there any performance hit when running say 1000
>> databases?  I don't think there would be, but I couldnt find a solid
>> answer anywhere.
>> 
>> Eric Savage
>> esavage@stripped
>> 

Sasha> There is an overhead, of course, but my guess is that it
Sasha> is not going to be very big in your situation ( this is
Sasha> just a guess, though). The final answer will depend on
Sasha> the types of queries you will be running. One advantage
Sasha> to table/database fragmentagtion is that you will not
Sasha> have to worry about reaching the maximum table size
Sasha> limit.

The major overhead in having 1000 databases is how good your operating 
system is to open a table in a specific database;  Some file systems
gets very slow when there are many files in a directory.

Regards,
Monty
Thread
Multiple Database Performance(Eric Savage)4 Jun
  • Re: Multiple Database PerformanceSasha Pachev4 Jun
    • Re: Multiple Database PerformanceMichael Widenius5 Jun