A sodden late night idea ... schemas don't need to have names that are meaningful to outsiders.
Still, the point about "political" aspects is an important one. OTH, schemas provide an elegant way of segregating
data.
My $0.02 (not worth what it was)
Greg Williamson
DBA
GlobeXplorer LLC
-----Original Message-----
From: pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org on behalf of Markus Schaber
Sent: Wed 7/5/2006 3:38 AM
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Cc:
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Is postgresql ca do the job for software deployed in
Hi, Mikael,
Just my 2 cents:
Mikael Carneholm wrote:
> Do you really need to create one *DB* per client - that is, is one
> schema (in the same DB) per client out of the question?
Sometimes, schemas would work _technically_, but not politically, as a
postgresql user cannot be prevented from listing all schemas (or even
all databases in the same user), regardless whether he/she has access
rights.
But it is not always acceptable that a customer knows which other
customers one has.
This forces the use of the "one cluster per customer" paradigm.
Thanks,
Markus
--
Markus Schaber | Logical Tracking&Tracing International AG
Dipl. Inf. | Software Development GIS
Fight against software patents in EU! www.ffii.org www.nosoftwarepatents.org
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?
http://archives.postgresql.org
!DSPAM:44ab96fb98231804284693!
