[wp-hackers] multiple databases vs different database prefixes

Ken Zaraque kenzaraque at gmail.com
Thu Aug 19 02:16:13 UTC 2010

Thank you all again for the responses. 

I too have concerns about backup & restore regimes.  that's why i'm leaning towards multiple small DBs.  It just seems safer. Each of these sites will need to be backed up separately, and a situation may arise where on a few of the sites needs to be restored to a previous version.  

I suppose if I use a large DB, I could always backup/restore a subset of the tables.

@Ryan - I like the quote by Mark Twain. That's why I'm cautious about using WP version 3.0's multisite feature.  It puts everything in one basket.  All the sites even share a common base code ( If I'm not mistaken ).  You mentioned you found articles on large vs small DBs. Can you send me a couple of links? I can't seem to find anything of great value. I might be searching with the wrong keywords.

@Jeremy - regarding PHPAdmi:  You bring up a good point with PHPAdmin choking on a large DB.  
@Jeremy - regarding backups/export: I don't see how having multiple DBs would be much of a pain during backups compared to one large DB. I would have thought that it's a simple script that goes through all the databases and does a msqldump. Am I missing something important? 

I appreciate all the advice guys.

On Aug 16, 2010, at 11:19 AM, Ryan Bilesky wrote:

> I have to agree with Jeremy on this. Heck I'm having a hard time just
> figuring out what one person/company could need 300 diffrent sites for.
> Maybe a large company liek Microsoft might need hundreds of sites for
> diffrnet things.  But I agree if you are going to have alot of sites why not
> use multisite.
> Back on topic, if you do an internet search there are many forums and other
> sites that talk about using one large db versus several small dbs.  The
> consesus I am seeming to find is that one large database is easier to
> maintain but several smaller dbs work well if each site for instance would
> need a seperate backup regimine, or if you want to split the databases
> accross multipule servers.
> Oh and a random but perhaps appropriate quote I found during this search:
> "Put all your eggs in one basket. And then, watch that basket!" -Mark Twain
> I think ultimatley it comes down to needs, idk that any one solution is
> beter than the other.  Each has  its own advantages and its abot what works
> best for your situation.  Such as do you want to split over multipule
> servers, do you want to easily share data between sites.
> On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 11:05 AM, Jeremy Clarke <jer at simianuprising.com>wrote:
>> P.S. With regard to your original question, wherein you are absolutely
>> required to have 300 sites and not use MS: I have to call into question the
>> decision-making that resulted in those requirements. Whatever you are
>> doing,
>> you are likely doing it wrong if that is your solution.
>> --
>> Jeremy Clarke | http://jeremyclarke.org
>> Code and Design | http://globalvoicesonline.org
>> _______________________________________________
>> wp-hackers mailing list
>> wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com
>> http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-hackers
> _______________________________________________
> wp-hackers mailing list
> wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com
> http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-hackers

More information about the wp-hackers mailing list