Multiple GDBs vs Single GDB

46576
62
01-19-2016 08:21 AM
mpboyle
Regular Contributor

Our production enterprise system is currently 1 sde gdb (Sql Server 2014) with several (45 to be exact) datasets and 9 editable versions (based on department). The sheer number of datasets makes it a little cumbersome for users to find what they may be searching for.

I was wondering if anyone has tried breaking down a large sde gdb into several smaller gdbs, perhaps 1 sde gdb per department?  If so, is there is a performance advantage of having 1 large sde gdb versus several smaller sde gdbs?  Is response time better for smaller gdb versus larger gdbs?  Would reducing the number of versions have a benefit on performance?

I'm hoping to get some pros / cons of having 1 large sde gdb which is like a one-stop-shop for any GIS needs or several smaller sde gdbs meant for departmental needs.

Thanks!

Tags (2)
62 Replies
DanPatterson_Retired
MVP Esteemed Contributor

Not a proposal, but a concern.   What about ... you lose one...you lose them all.  That would be my main concern.

mpboyle
Regular Contributor

Dan Patterson​,

Do you mean database corruption, or something similar?  If so, I would think having several smaller gdbs would be advantageous, not a disadvantage.  If 1 gdb became corrupt, it's not a total loss of data.  In terms of backups, our Sql backups are automated by our DBA, so, personally, I'm not terribly concerned with a db becoming corrupt.

If the server itself became non-functional, it wouldn't really matter.

0 Kudos
JoeBorgione
MVP Esteemed Contributor

Sounds nightmarish to me; I'd be inclined to split them off.  A little more work up front for you, but long term, I think easier.

Like Dan Patterson says: lose one lose them all.

I've gone the multi-version one db route.  Hated it; left me wondering what the final edit should be with conflicts.  Do you really have datasets pr do you mean feature classes?  Actual datasets in SDE are in and of themselves nightmarish imho....

That should just about do it....
mpboyle
Regular Contributor

Joe Borgione​,

Did you end up splitting up your multi-version one gdb?  If so, do you find performance advantages?...administrative advantages?

...and yes, 45 datasets containing 278 feature classes.

0 Kudos
JacobBoyle
Occasional Contributor III

That's not a lot

That's just one of 12 databases.

JoeBorgione
MVP Esteemed Contributor

They better be paying you an awful lot!  ( Jacob Boyle​ )

That should just about do it....
JoeBorgione
MVP Esteemed Contributor

Didn't split up the db's, got rid of the versions instead;  mine is a much smaller operation than what you and Jacob Boyle​ describe; just a few feature classes.  I started with one version per user.  That got old fast.

I do have a couple of databases now; an edit database and I replicate to a readonly  SDE database for non-editing users.

Also, any and all published data comes from a File Geodatabase, that is a child from the edit SDE in a one-way, parent to child replication set up.  Database replication is the best thing since hash browns imho....

That should just about do it....
BradAverbeck
New Contributor II

How do you handle schema changes in the replication scenario?

0 Kudos
mpboyle
Regular Contributor

Brad Averbeck​,

You can view this thread I started that deals with gdb replication.