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

• Re: Multiple logical databases at 2006-02-02 22:13:24 from Josh Berkus

pgsql-hackers by date

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

pgsql-patches by date

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