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

Re: Multiple logical databases

From: "Mark Woodward" <pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Multiple logical databases
Date: 2006-02-02 15:57:09
Message-ID: 16654.24.91.171.78.1138895829.squirrel@mail.mohawksoft.com (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?

Seriously? No use at all? You don't see any purpose in controlling and
managing multiple postgresql postmaster processes from one central point?
Sure you don't want to think about this a little?

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Andreas PflugDate: 2006-02-02 16:12:47
Subject: Re: Multiple logical databases
Previous:From: Mark WoodwardDate: 2006-02-02 15:23:44
Subject: Multiple logical databases

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Andreas PflugDate: 2006-02-02 16:12:47
Subject: Re: Multiple logical databases
Previous:From: Alvaro HerreraDate: 2006-02-02 15:34:28
Subject: Re: TODO-Item: TRUNCATE ... CASCADE

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