Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: One big database or little separate ones?

From: Eric Frazier <ef(at)kwinternet(dot)com>
To: Bruno LEVEQUE <bruno(dot)leveque(at)net6d(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-novice(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: One big database or little separate ones?
Date: 2004-01-10 23:11:49
Message-ID: 1073776310.475.53.camel@debian (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-novice
Hi,

The only reason to separate databases, is if the data has no relation
from one DB to another. Otherwise, you are just making things hard on
yourself. 


Eric 

On Sat, 2004-01-10 at 14:14, Bruno LEVEQUE wrote:
> 
> 
> Dennis Veatch wrote:
> 
> >On Saturday 10 January 2004 04:38 pm, you wrote:
> >  
> >
> >>Hi,
> >>
> >>In my opinion, if there are relations between each parts, do only one
> >>database (only one connection needed). In the other case do a database
> >>for each separate part (like this no risk of bad manipulation).
> >>
> >>Bruno
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >Yes there will be relations with nearly all if not all of the parts.
> >
> >One thing I forgot to mention, this will be plugged into postgis. At the 
> >minimum I envision customers and well logs being used by postgis or vise 
> >versa. 
> >
> >
> >  
> >
> >>Dennis Veatch wrote:
> >>    
> >>
> >>>In creating a database I am trying to determine which method is the better
> >>>way to go. No, I do not know what "better way" means, novice is the key,
> >>>hence this post.
> >>>
> >>>The basic question is, what point(s) are used to determine there are
> >>>enough tables and another database should be created. Hmm, well let me
> >>>say it this way.
> >>>
> >>>Here are briefly (for the most part) the things I want in a database;
> >>>
> >>>1. customers - the usual stuff, names, addresses, etc.
> >>>2. well logs - depth of water wells, location (latitude/longitude as well
> >>>as the normal address), layers drilled through, etc.
> >>>3. excavator work - hourly rate, length of dig, etc.
> >>>3. plumbing - items used on project, part cost, etc
> >>>4. septic work - installation of septic tanks, address, cost, etc
> >>>5. water softeners - customer name, is it a rental or not
> >>>6. supplies/parts - inventory type stuff.
> >>>
> >>>The basic decision here is, do I put all this into one database with a
> >>>bunch of table? Or would it make more sense to separate it out? If there
> >>>are separate databases will it prevent linking tables between the two?
> >>>      
> >>>
> >
> >  
> >
> 
> -- 
> Bruno LEVEQUE
> System Engineer
> SARL NET6D
> bruno(dot)leveque(at)net6d(dot)com
> http://www.net6d.com
> 
> 
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
>       subscribe-nomail command to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org so that your
>       message can get through to the mailing list cleanly



In response to

Responses

pgsql-novice by date

Next:From: ghaverlaDate: 2004-01-11 02:37:15
Subject: Re: One big database or little separate ones?
Previous:From: Bruno LEVEQUEDate: 2004-01-10 22:14:36
Subject: Re: One big database or little separate ones?

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group