mirror of
https://we.phorge.it/source/phorge.git
synced 2024-11-18 21:02:41 +01:00
Fix a couple typos in "why so many databases?" document
Summary: One missing word, one `0` that should be a `)`, simplify a couple of mega-clauses to improve readability? Test Plan: ((O)) . ((O)) Reviewers: michaeljs1990, chad Reviewed By: chad Differential Revision: https://secure.phabricator.com/D15252
This commit is contained in:
parent
f5c8a2fb18
commit
8661170819
1 changed files with 15 additions and 16 deletions
|
@ -54,10 +54,10 @@ Operating at Scale
|
|||
This storage design is aimed at large installs that may need more than one
|
||||
physical database server to handle the load the install generates.
|
||||
|
||||
The primary reason we a database per application is to allow large installs to
|
||||
scale up by spreading database load across more hardware. A large organization
|
||||
with many thousands of active users may find themselves limited by the capacity
|
||||
of a single database backend.
|
||||
The primary reason we use a separate database for each application is to allow
|
||||
large installs to scale up by spreading database load across more hardware. A
|
||||
large organization with many thousands of active users may find themselves
|
||||
limited by the capacity of a single database backend.
|
||||
|
||||
If so, they can launch a second backend, move some applications over to it, and
|
||||
continue piling on more users.
|
||||
|
@ -80,30 +80,29 @@ Ease of Development
|
|||
===================
|
||||
|
||||
This design is also easier for us to work with, and easier for users who
|
||||
want to work with the raw database data to understand and interact with.
|
||||
want to work with the raw data in the database.
|
||||
|
||||
We have a large number of tables (more than 400) and we can not reasonably
|
||||
reduce the number of tables very much (each table generally represents some
|
||||
meaningful type of object in some application0. It's easier to develop with
|
||||
meaningful type of object in some application). It's easier to develop with
|
||||
tables which are organized into separate application databases, just like it's
|
||||
easier to work with a large project if you organize source files into
|
||||
directories.
|
||||
|
||||
If you aren't developing Phabricator and never look at the data in the
|
||||
database, you probably don't benefit from this organization. However, if you
|
||||
database, you probably won't benefit from this organization. However, if you
|
||||
are a developer or want to extend Phabricator or look under the hood, it's
|
||||
easier to find what you're looking for and work with the tables and data when
|
||||
they're organized by application.
|
||||
easier to find what you're looking for and work with the tables when they're
|
||||
organized by application.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Databases Have No Cost
|
||||
======================
|
||||
More Databases Cost Nothing
|
||||
===========================
|
||||
|
||||
In almost all cases, creating databases has zero cost, just like organizing
|
||||
source code into directories has zero cost.
|
||||
|
||||
Even if we didn't derive enormous benefits from this approach at scale, there
|
||||
is little reason //not// to organize storage like this.
|
||||
In almost all cases, creating more databases has zero cost, just like
|
||||
organizing source code into directories has zero cost. Even if we didn't derive
|
||||
enormous benefits from this approach at scale, there is little reason //not//
|
||||
to organize storage like this.
|
||||
|
||||
There are a handful of administrative tasks which are very slightly more
|
||||
complex to perform on multiple databases, but these are all either automated
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in a new issue