Re: Multiple logical databases

From: Doug McNaught <doug(at)mcnaught(dot)org>
To: "Mark Woodward" <pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com>
Cc: "Tino Wildenhain" <tino(at)wildenhain(dot)de>, "Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, "Stephan Szabo" <sszabo(at)megazone(dot)bigpanda(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Multiple logical databases
Date: 2006-02-03 13:24:21
Message-ID: 87wtgczibe.fsf@asmodeus.mcnaught.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

"Mark Woodward" <pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com> writes:

> The point is, that I have been working with this sort of "use case" for a
> number of years, and being able to represent multiple physical databases
> as one logical db server would make life easier. It was a brainstorm I had
> while I was setting this sort of system for the [n]th time.

It sounds like all that would be needed is a kind of "smart
proxy"--has a list of database clusters on the machine and the
databases they contain, and speaks enough of the protocol to recognize
the startup packet and reroute it internally to the right cluster.
I've heard 'pgpool' mentioned here; from a quick look at the docs it
looks similar but not quite what you want.

So your databases would listen on 5433, 5434, etc and the proxy would
listen on 5432 and route everything properly. If a particular cluster
is not up, the proxy could just error out the connection.

Hmm, that'd be fun to write if I ever find the time...

-Doug

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Chris Campbell 2006-02-03 13:33:23 Re: Passing arguments to views
Previous Message Mark Woodward 2006-02-03 13:05:48 Re: Multiple logical databases

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Martijn van Oosterhout 2006-02-03 13:34:25 Re: Multiple logical databases
Previous Message Mark Woodward 2006-02-03 13:05:48 Re: Multiple logical databases