From: | Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Matthew T(dot) OConnor" <matthew(at)zeut(dot)net> |
Cc: | Dave Page <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk>, Iavor Raytchev <iavor(dot)raytchev(at)verysmall(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-interfaces <pgsql-interfaces(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] pgaccess - where to store the own data |
Date: | 2002-08-30 18:12:28 |
Message-ID: | 3D6FB58C.4010501@joeconway.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-interfaces |
Matthew T. OConnor wrote:
> One thought is to use a completely separate database, but also allow it
> to be stored in the current database if the user wants it too. This
> also solves the case of a user that can't create a new database for his
> admin tool (permissions etc...). Also, it might be cleaner now that we
> have schemea support to create one pgadmin, or pgaccess schemea in the
> database, that handled all the others.
>
As someone else mentioned (I think), even using a separate schema is not
always an acceptable option. If you are using a "packaged" application
(whether commercial or open source), you usually don't want *any*
changes to the vendor provided database. Particularly with commercial
software, that can mean loss of, or problems with, technical support, or
problems when upgrading.
Joe
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Matthew T. OConnor | 2002-08-30 18:43:38 | Re: [HACKERS] pgaccess - where to store the own data |
Previous Message | Matthew T. OConnor | 2002-08-30 17:59:22 | Re: [HACKERS] pgaccess - where to store the own data |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Matthew T. OConnor | 2002-08-30 18:43:38 | Re: [HACKERS] pgaccess - where to store the own data |
Previous Message | Matthew T. OConnor | 2002-08-30 17:59:22 | Re: [HACKERS] pgaccess - where to store the own data |