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

Re: Multiple logical databases

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Mark Woodward" <pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Multiple logical databases
Date: 2006-02-02 15:19:04
Message-ID: 15666.1138893544@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-patches
"Mark Woodward" <pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com> writes:
> One of the problems with the current PostgreSQL design is that all the
> databases operated by one postmaster server process are interlinked at
> some core level. They all share the same system tables. If one database
> becomes corrupt because of disk or something, the whole cluster is
> affected.

This problem is not as large as you paint it, because most of the system
catalogs are *not* shared.

> Does anyone see this as useful?

No...

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Mark WoodwardDate: 2006-02-02 15:23:44
Subject: Multiple logical databases
Previous:From: Andrew DunstanDate: 2006-02-02 15:13:30
Subject: Re: Multiple logical databases

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Mark WoodwardDate: 2006-02-02 15:23:44
Subject: Multiple logical databases
Previous:From: Andrew DunstanDate: 2006-02-02 15:13:30
Subject: Re: Multiple logical databases

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