From: | Venkata B Nagothi <nag1010(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Rakesh Kumar <rakeshkumar464(at)outlook(dot)com> |
Cc: | "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Multi tenancy : schema vs databases |
Date: | 2016-09-29 21:25:30 |
Message-ID: | CAEyp7J-ZqiMvVukQUytdYx_d=2Nh6ST9RS+SzZ0nVSzqHYozew@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 5:18 AM, Rakesh Kumar <rakeshkumar464(at)outlook(dot)com>
wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> I would like to know which technique is better for supporting
> multi-tenancy=
> applications, going upto hundreds or even thousands of tenants.
>
> 1 - One database with difference schemas (one schema per tenant)
> or
> 2 - One database per tenant.
>
Did you mean one database with-in a postgresql cluster ?
> The points to be considered are:
>
> 1 - which is more light weight from resources point of view.
> 2 - which is easier for backup/restore
> 3 - Which is better from security p.o.v
>
A schema per tenant would probably be a good idea to go with. Since, you
are saying there could be thousands of tenants, going for
single-database-per-tenant could possibly end up in a very bad and complex
database design.
One point to consider would be that, how different could be the
backup/restore, security or any other database policies for different
tenants.
Regards,
Venkata B N
Database Consultant / Architect
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | David Rowley | 2016-09-29 21:29:01 | Re: Parallel query only when EXPLAIN ANALYZEd |
Previous Message | Vinicius Segalin | 2016-09-29 21:23:51 | Re: Query generator |