Re: Changing the concept of a DATABASE

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Susanne Ebrecht <susanne(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Changing the concept of a DATABASE
Date: 2012-05-22 15:42:55
Message-ID: 1423.1337701375@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Susanne Ebrecht <susanne(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> The use case in my mind for accessing more databases is when you want to
> access stuff different languages.

> You only can set encoding / LC_Collate per database not per schema.

> So for different languages you might need different databases to do
> correct sorting / indexing.

Encoding yes, but since 9.1 we have pretty fine-grained control of
collation. So I think this argument is a lot weaker than it used
to be. It would only really apply if you have one of the corner
cases where utf8 doesn't work for you.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Florian Pflug 2012-05-22 15:57:57 Re: Per-Database Roles
Previous Message Susanne Ebrecht 2012-05-22 15:36:49 Re: Changing the concept of a DATABASE