I know of one server that did over a million, of course not all were highly active.
On Thursday, January 27, 2011, Zachary Zolton <[email protected]> wrote: > Johnny, > > CouchDB is known to handle thousands of databases per server, but > depending on your usage you may need to do some tweaks for the max > number of open databases/file descriptors: > > http://wiki.apache.org/couchdb/Performance#Resource_Limits > > > Cheers, > > Zach > > On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 10:06 AM, John Nelson > <[email protected]> wrote: >> TLDR: Does CouchDB (conspiring with the OS?) handle thousands of databases >> well or should I use the tried-and-true-but-aggravating mapping on >> [group_id, ...] or is there a better pattern that I am unfamiliar with? >> >> I'm building a web application that is group-oriented, by which I mean that >> each user is interested in documents produced only by the group to which >> they belong. There is no sharing of information across groups at all. >> >> Since these groups are completely isolated, it seems logical to house each >> one there own database but this makes the side of me familiar with RDBMS >> very uncomfortable. I found one blog post by John Wood which suggested that >> there "appears to be no “penalty” for hosting many databases within the same >> CouchDB server." However, in my case, there would be roughly 1,000 - 5,000 >> groups. From what I understand, each database is stored as the data file >> plus various index files. This would mean there are thousands of file >> handles -- it seems like a bad idea. >> >> Thanks in advance, Johnny >> >
