Will I see a performance difference
between the two following setups
* The two sets of tables are in one DB
* The two sets of tables are in two separate DBs on the same SQL
No - not unless you separate the databases onto different hard drives (and even that is debatable as to whether it would impact performance given that we have no other info).
So remove "performance" from your mental checklist of what you should consider in this design. That means the question is one of domain - "Should I place them in the same database or different databases" should depend on how related they are.
If I have two sets of database tables
used by a system
* Tables that collect results of some data processing. Most of the time
get a lot of INSERT operations.
* Tables that are used by the web application to generate pages and
For this question, lets assume the
sets of tables are mutually exclusive
(maybe there is some process that
migrates data from the first to the
second set periodically).
I don't understand what you mean by "the sets of tables are mutually exclusive". From the description, the tables do seem to be related (and by "related", I mean that they should be grouped together in the same database) since may periodically migrate the data between them.
As such, I think that you likely need one database.