Re: Database organization questions
От | Simon Riggs |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Database organization questions |
Дата | |
Msg-id | BANLkTin0YucQ83bRc+Z4bhvuToJ0XkobHA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Database organization questions (matty jones <urlugal@gmail.com>) |
Список | pgsql-novice |
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 3:17 PM, matty jones <urlugal@gmail.com> wrote: > What I think I am going to do is design the table structure for my db and > then use a trigger to update the otrs tables(kept separate) when necessary. > If I mixed the tables then I could potentially run into issues when I do an > upgrade of otrs or if I need to change something on my end down the line. > Keeping them separate seems to make more sense to me right now. Keeping them separate makes lots of sense. Modularity is an important design pattern for enterprise data and the services around them. Technically, there are many ways to implement separation. Triggers work, but it would be a design decision that forces you to keep those two services on the same system. I would recommend using a technology that allows more flexibility for future placement of databases. That would be a generalised replication solution, though you might generalise further and adopt an ETL or real time integration tool. -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-novice по дате отправления: