Re: PG vs MySQL - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Mike Nolan
Subject Re: PG vs MySQL
Date
Msg-id 200403300016.i2U0G4aZ019384@gw.tssi.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: PG vs MySQL  ("Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@postgresql.org>)
Responses Re: PG vs MySQL
Re: PG vs MySQL
List pgsql-general
> Now, that doesn't preclude clients from seeing the names of another
> clients database using \l, but unless there is gross mis-management of the
> pg_hba.conf, seeing the names of other databases doesn't give other
> clients any benefits ...

That rather depends upon what those clients are doing, doesn't it?

I can see benefits from being able to completely isolate one client/database
from another,  even to the point of not giving them any hints that they're
sharing the same database server.  (Depending on how fanatical I am about
it, there are other solutions, such as separate instances or completely
separate physical systems, but those present a different set of
administrative issues.)

It may be more of a marketing issue than a technical one.  If we want
increased commercial acceptance, that may be one of the higher priority
features from an ISP's (or his clients') point of view, if not from ours.
--
Mike Nolan


pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: "Marc G. Fournier"
Date:
Subject: Re: PG vs MySQL
Next
From: "Marc G. Fournier"
Date:
Subject: Re: PG vs MySQL