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

Re: Multiple logical databases

From: Richard Huxton <dev(at)archonet(dot)com>
To: josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Multiple logical databases
Date: 2006-02-03 08:11:58
Message-ID: 43E3104E.209@archonet.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-patches
Josh Berkus wrote:
> Mark,
> 
>> Even though they run on the same machine, run the same version of the
>> software, and are used by the same applications, they have NO
>> interoperability. For now, lets just accept that they need to be on
>> separate physical clusters because some need to be able to started and
>> stopped while others need to remain running, there are other reasons,
>> but one reason will suffice for the discussion.
> 
> For an immediate solution to what you are encountering, have you looked at 
> pgPool?

I agree with Josh - pgpool sounds like the place to start with this.

That's got to be the easiest place to add some sort of "listall"/"switch 
todb" functionality. It also means you're not *forced* to have only one 
version of PG, or have them all on the same machine.

-- 
   Richard Huxton
   Archonet Ltd

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: andrewDate: 2006-02-03 09:46:26
Subject: look up tables while parsing queries
Previous:From: Tino WildenhainDate: 2006-02-03 07:16:46
Subject: Re: Multiple logical databases

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Kris JurkaDate: 2006-02-03 11:18:24
Subject: win codepages 1253, 1254, 1255, 1257 and cleanup
Previous:From: Tino WildenhainDate: 2006-02-03 07:16:46
Subject: Re: Multiple logical databases

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