Skip to:

Rationale for multiple activity tables?

  • Is there a specific design decision behind each user have 3 activity tables? Running the system with a couple thousand users would seem to be very hard on the db and os to deal with that many open tables.

Viewing 2 replies - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)

  • Andy Peatling


    Multiple tables allows you to split the DB into lots of smaller ones and across servers.

    Is there already logic in the code that would allow me to configure that users 1-1000 have activity on server1 (associated with specific DSN params), users 1001-2000 have activity logs on server2 (separate DSN) etc.? I’m not seeing it in the code, but I might be overlooking something.

    I’d think using an innodb table type and allowing the db to handle table partitioning/sharding at the db level would make more sense for people concerned about running across multiple servers. Have there been experiences with large BP installations that would run counter to that way of thinking?

Viewing 2 replies - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)
  • The topic ‘Rationale for multiple activity tables?’ is closed to new replies.
Skip to toolbar