From: | Sean Davis <sdavis2(at)mail(dot)nih(dot)gov> |
---|---|
To: | Pandu Poluan <pandu(at)poluan(dot)info> |
Cc: | pgsql <pgsql-novice(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: One PostgreSQL server for multiple apps? |
Date: | 2014-02-23 15:28:12 |
Message-ID: | CANeAVB=OXN=deEMRh90w8OLDcsYBbTbRa2PuR3UH1gc12tdABg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-novice |
A single postgresql server can host multiple separate databases, each with
its own data, authentication, etc. This single-server, multiple-database
approach is a typical deployment strategy.
On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 9:52 AM, Pandu Poluan <pandu(at)poluan(dot)info> wrote:
> Hello!
>
> First, I apologize if this email sounds very... novice. I came from MS SQL
> Server background, and am recently 'plunged' into a mid-to-long term
> project to drop dependencies on proprietary databases, and use PostgreSQL
> instead.
>
> Now, in MS SQL Server, I can create a single server to service several
> apps together. If the app is a light load and doesn't require something
> more than db_owner privileges, I usually just clump them together in the
> Default instance, using a new 'database'. If the app has heavier
> requirements, then I would spin up a new instance, on the same server
> (provided RAM and IOPS requirements suffice, of course).
>
> How would the same principle be applied in PostgreSQL?
>
> Thanks in advance for your kind guide.
>
> Rgds,
> --
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Pandu Poluan | 2014-02-23 15:37:09 | Re: One PostgreSQL server for multiple apps? |
Previous Message | Pandu Poluan | 2014-02-23 14:52:59 | One PostgreSQL server for multiple apps? |