From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Raymond <support(at)bigriverinfotech(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Multiple Instances |
Date: | 2001-12-10 04:53:11 |
Message-ID: | 25459.1007959991@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Raymond <support(at)bigriverinfotech(dot)com> writes:
> I would like to create a default pgsql directory in etc/skel (rh72) and have
> a postgres instance with unique port number available for each user.
> Although I am reasonably sure this is technically possible, what are the
> resource implications of a few dozen instances of Postgres on a single
> machine???
You could do that, but why not give each user a database within a single
postgres instance, instead?
With separate instances, you have to size each instance for the user's
peak resource consumption; with a shared instance you can assume that
not everyone will be pushing the limit at the same time.
AFAICS, the only drawback of a shared instance is that backend crashes
affect all users not just one. If your users are doing server-side code
development then that might be sufficient reason for partitioning them
into separate instances. But under ordinary usage, backend crashes
shouldn't happen.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | rolf.ostvik | 2001-12-10 08:08:08 | Re: on update set default |
Previous Message | tek1 | 2001-12-10 02:19:39 | Re: alternative place to download pgaccess |