Re: Limit on number of users in postgresql?

From: "Jeremy Haile" <jhaile(at)fastmail(dot)fm>
To: "Furface" <furface(at)omnicode(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Limit on number of users in postgresql?
Date: 2007-01-29 20:04:08
Message-ID: 1170101048.30719.1171822961@webmail.messagingengine.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

> The more I think about it, the more I think a proxy app is necessary.
> It seems like a lot of work just for security issues, but basically most
> web based database apps use this model, with the web application acting
> as a proxy between the database and the client.

This is how I've seen it done on almost every application I've worked
on. If you have multiple apps hitting a single DB, usually each
application has it's own role. But user-level security is controlled at
the application-level. Although I don't think there's anything *wrong*
with having a role-per-user (it could provide an "extra" layer of
security), I think it's much more flexible to define security in the
application/business logic layer.

That being said, we shouldn't get too wound up over this "limitation" of
PostgreSQL until someone finds that there really is some real-world
performance issue. AFAIK, everything in this thread is theoretical.

Cheers,
Jeremy Haile

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message TWENGER2 2007-01-29 20:06:43 dependency ?
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2007-01-29 19:58:00 Re: Locking question?