Re: Changing the concept of a DATABASE - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Josh Berkus
Subject Re: Changing the concept of a DATABASE
Date
Msg-id 4FBBCA71.3080505@agliodbs.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Changing the concept of a DATABASE  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>)
Responses Re: Changing the concept of a DATABASE
List pgsql-hackers
> 1. Ability to have a Role that can only access one Database
> 
> 2. Allow user info to be dumped with a database, to make a db
> completely self-consistent
> 
> 3. Allow databases to be transportable
> 
> 4. Allow users to access tables in >1 database easily, with appropriate rights.

The last requirement seems completely contradictory to the other three.Either we're trying to make databases even more
isolatedas
 
multi-tenant Catalogs, or we're not.  Trying to do both at the same time
is failure-by-design.

Given that we offer schema as an alternative to multiple databases, and
users are starting to get used to them, I think that requirement (4) is
just a bad idea, and not worth pursuing, except in the context of pgsql_fdw.

-- 
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: David Fetter
Date:
Subject: Re: How could we make it simple to access the log as a table?
Next
From: Jeff Janes
Date:
Subject: Add primary key/unique constraint using prefix columns of an index