Re: Changing the concept of a DATABASE
От | Simon Riggs |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Changing the concept of a DATABASE |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+U5nMJYXG2B73Sx-SQ+k-uiwSq6sXcRTtjQFW5j-9cKtF=XaA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Changing the concept of a DATABASE (Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Changing the concept of a DATABASE
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 22 May 2012 18:35, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote: > >> If I have a customer with 1 database per user, how do they run a query >> against 100 user tables? It would require 100 connections to the >> database. Doing that would require roughly x100 the planning time and >> x100 the connection delay. Larger SQL statements pass their results >> between executor steps using libpq rather than direct calls. > > Why is this hypothetical customer using separate databases? This really > seems like a case of "doctor, it hurts when I do this". Databases are great for separating things, but sometimes you want to un-separate them in a practical way. I'm surprised that you're so negative about an ease of use feature. I had understood you cared about fixing problems experienced by our developers. -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: