From: | Melvin Davidson <melvin6925(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Multi tenancy : schema vs databases |
Date: | 2016-10-01 23:21:47 |
Message-ID: | CANu8FizbGD05qL4-gfKzL=Mr77xvXJ0-NNE4OMmj-4CeVo10jg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Sat, Oct 1, 2016 at 4:52 PM, John R Pierce <pierce(at)hogranch(dot)com> wrote:
> On 10/1/2016 12:52 PM, Rakesh Kumar wrote:
>
> Do your clients authenticate directly to the database, or to the app server?
>
> thru app server.
>
>
> do you run a separate instance of the app for each tenant, or is there one
> app that identifies the tenant and handles them accordingly ?
>
>
> --
> john r pierce, recycling bits in santa cruz
>
>
*I would like to comment on the multiple schema vs databases situation.
First of all, 1000's of databases is insanity and just asking for trouble.
Next, 1000's of schemas is a nightmare to maintain. I understand the
requirement for client data to be "isolated", but in reality, data is never
really separated. Once it's on the server, any good hacker with a knowledge
of SQL can find it. So, IMHO, the best solution is to isolate by a client
ID in the tables of one database. Then make sure you have sufficient and
correct security on those tables.*
--
*Melvin Davidson*
I reserve the right to fantasize. Whether or not you
wish to share my fantasy is entirely up to you.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Rakesh Kumar | 2016-10-02 00:26:14 | Re: Multi tenancy : schema vs databases |
Previous Message | John R Pierce | 2016-10-01 20:52:41 | Re: Multi tenancy : schema vs databases |