Ok, maybe I am missing something here but I am searching at various PHP hosting options and that i see such things as "10 MySQL databases", or 25 as well as limitless.

Now I have done sites by having an Oracle after sales which have 10,000+ concurrent customers and we have had... one database.

The thought of a database is, obviously, that you could store anything you want inside it. So why do for MySQL the number matters? Can there be some table, row or overall database limit I am unaware of (possible)? Or perhaps is it an issue or concurrent connections? Or another performance problem (eg sharding)? The sharding aspect appears unlikely because even fundamental hosting options (ie under $5/month) I see with 10 databases.

If a person could clue me in on that one, it would be great.

It's mainly an advertising and marketing tactic, although you will find some technical and historic factors.

First, apologies if this sounds like apparent, but SCHEMAs will be to Oracle as DATABASES will be to MySQL (in over simplified terms, may well collections of tables).

The host says you could have XX quantity of set up logical databases on the server. Plenty of web programs require a database to operate. Modern web programs like Wordpress, Movable Type, Joomla, etc., enables you to title your tables having a custom prefix. However, if the application does not have this configuration feature which means you'll need one database per install. Also, inside a similar vein, if two programs have a similar table title, they cannot exist together in one database. Plenty of early web programs began out such as this, so in early stages quantity of databases was an essential feature to think about.

Additionally, there are access and security. While MySQL (along with other databases) could be set up to provide customers fine grained access-control lower towards the table and column level, it's frequently simpler to produce one user that has full permission on the logical Database. This will be significant to individuals who sell services but pass from the actual hosting of completed sites/programs towards the shared web-host.

Many people like one database per application

It's marketing, not technical. They need something to market. "10" seems like many.

After I used hosting that is shared, I setup another database for every site/client for custom applications, and when you utilize Fantastico to set up programs it'll make use of a database for every one automatically.

In my opinion the limits exist to prompt you to definitely upgrade to another tier and services information whenever you outgrow the present level.

For development reasons, sometimes it is good to create a copy of the entire database to check new software against. Beats renaming all of the tables inside your code (although applications like Wordpress allow you to specify a prefix for your table names just in case you do not have the posh of multiple DBs).

Nick is partly correct, it has related to individuals who will attempt to host multiple sites on a single shared account and can make use of a different database for every along with a script for everyone the right content after some dns masquerading.

Furthermore its possibly an advertising and marketing perspective.

If you are only establishing databases on your own, the reduced count is okay. however for commerical customers, whom might want to have multiple sites for multiple clients about the one service, attempting to scrimp, you are prone to need 1 Database ( or even more ) per client/project.

So placing a limit on quantity of databases controls somewhat the range services you are offering, and potentially limits possibility of your "resale" value, ie: to prevent you purchasing 1 plan after which selling it onto someone else, like "subleasing".

This really is mainly for when you're hosting multiple sites on a single box. For me personally, I purchaseOrmarket a great deal websites so I have to have the ability to keep each website as detached in the others as you possibly can.