3 ms·
While I won't argue that you need some type of relational tables, I wouldn't consider creating thirty-thousand of them working really well. I'd be curious as to
by overcast 10y ago
While I won't argue that you need some type of relational tables, I wouldn't consider creating thirty-thousand of them working really well. I'd be curious as to how RethinkDB would work for you.
- barrkel 10y agoWhat evidence would you require for proof that it's working well? We have the evidence we need already: a working solution well within its hardware constraints and performing excellently. There aren't many operations that scale worse than linearly in the number of tables (primarily schema queries), and not many operations are affected at all. The biggest thing to remember is to turn off the background schema queries your database client might try and do. (We are, however, using MySQL, not Postgres, primarily because of the lack of a decent replication solution at the time the app was built.)
- overcast 10y agoI don't really need any evidence, other than knowing someone is managing 30,000 tables, or worse, 200,000. I'm glad it's working for you, it just sounds like a complete nightmare to manage.