[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       postgresql-general
Subject:    Re: [GENERAL] Max tables in a union
From:       Fred Miller <fred () frederickmiller ! com>
Date:       2010-10-30 13:18:52
Message-ID: 2EF544E5-D47B-4743-AE7B-EA2C424E89BB () frederickmiller ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

Thanks all -- I made my first post under an unregistered account.  It was stalled.  \
Then I posted under my registered account - to which Tom Lane replied (thanks Tom)  \
Then later my first post punched through making it seem like I didn't see Tom Lane's \
reply.

We have some dynamic-schema generation action happening here and are using unions for \
at least the time-being.   Potential perf issues aside, we just wanted to be aware of \
the limits if there were any.

Thanks again.

On Oct 30, 2010, at 3:22 AM, Scott Marlowe wrote:

> On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 3:11 PM, Fred Miller <fred.miller@me.com> wrote:
> > What is the maximum number of tables allowed in a union in 8.4 and 9.0?
> 
> I'm not aware of any preset limit.  I'd guess you'd run into
> performance problems before you hit a limit.
> -- 
> To understand recursion, one must first understand recursion.


-- 
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]