Re: schema or database

From: Michael Cheung <vividy(at)justware(dot)co(dot)jp>
To: John R Pierce <pierce(at)hogranch(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: schema or database
Date: 2015-04-13 03:01:20
Message-ID: 20150413120119.6167.8B406A0E@justware.co.jp
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Thanks for your additional comment.
It is more clear, I'd better to using schema more than using database.

yours, michael

On Sun, 12 Apr 2015 19:24:30 -0700
John R Pierce <pierce(at)hogranch(dot)com> wrote:

> On 4/12/2015 7:20 PM, Ian Barwick wrote:
> > If as you say access to the database is via a single application database
> > user, it will probably make more sense to use multiple schemas rather than
> > multiple databases. Keeping everything in one database will simplify
> > administration (e.g. making backups - ypu'll just need to dump the one database
> > rather than looping through a variable number) and will make life easier if you
> > ever need to do some kind of query involving multiple customers.
> > There will also be less overhead when adding a new schema vs adding
> > a new database.
>
> and less overhead in connections, as one client connection can serve multiple customers
>
> -- john r pierce, recycling bits in santa cruz
>
>
>
> -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jim Nasby 2015-04-13 03:35:27 Re: Limiting user from changing its own attributes
Previous Message Michael Cheung 2015-04-13 02:55:42 Re: schema or database