multi-tenant vs. multi-cluster - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Ben Chobot
Subject multi-tenant vs. multi-cluster
Date
Msg-id 686F095E-6ECF-45FA-B78A-F3D29D368585@silentmedia.com
Whole thread Raw
Responses Re: multi-tenant vs. multi-cluster  (Ivan Voras <ivoras@freebsd.org>)
List pgsql-general
We're considering using postgres as a way to host database services for many, many independent applications. One
obviousway to do this is with schemas, roles, and proper permissions, but that still leaves open the possibility for
somepoorly written application to leave open transactions and affect others.  

Another possible way to go is to use debian's ability to easily run multiple clusters, but while this option gives
betterisolation, I imaging it comes at a cost of more overhead, both in terms of memory and in terms of support. I
supposemy question is, how much overhead? I'm less worried about support (that's what scripts are for) but if we're
talkingan extra 50MB of memory per cluster, that will start to add up. 

How have you guys offered multi-tenant postgres services? Am I forgetting something?

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Merlin Moncure
Date:
Subject: Re: query taking much longer since Postgres 8.4 upgrade
Next
From: Ivan Voras
Date:
Subject: Re: multi-tenant vs. multi-cluster