Many little databases or one big one?
От | Jason Hihn |
---|---|
Тема | Many little databases or one big one? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | NGBBLHANMLKMHPDGJGAPEEMOCIAA.jhihn@paytimepayroll.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответы |
Re: Many little databases or one big one?
Re: Many little databases or one big one? Re: Many little databases or one big one? |
Список | pgsql-general |
In all likelihood, I will be admin'ing several hundred databases whose schema is identical. Being the lazy admin that I am, I was thinking that it may be better for me to combine everything into one large database and just make views for each former database (after appending a key to each table, and appropriately naming the view). This would be much more manageable, since db objects (procedures, triggers, table schemas) would update for all at once. My developer team is changing things pretty frequently too. To enforce version consistency through all the databases, this would be the best and easiest way to do that. What are the down sides? I know that I can no longer partition the data into separate directories. A table corruption would effect everyone. More data needs to be stored (addt'l keys). Are there other downsides? If there are too many down sides, is there an easier way I can update the db objects (a tool) for each DB all at once? Thank you (again!)
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: