Re: Multi tenancy : schema vs databases

From: Rakesh Kumar <rakeshkumar464(at)outlook(dot)com>
To: Paul Jungwirth <pj(at)illuminatedcomputing(dot)com>, "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Multi tenancy : schema vs databases
Date: 2016-09-30 15:45:44
Message-ID: DM2PR05MB622084F6772CC1EA820E4828CC10@DM2PR05MB622.namprd05.prod.outlook.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

> I've been reading this discussion with great interest, to see what other
> Postgres experts think. :-)

I am bit disappointed that most of the replies are questioning why we are
doing what we are doing. Once again, we (db designers) have no choice
in that. What I would like to know that which one is better :- multiple db
vs multiple schema. Read few interesting arguments and noted that
connection pooling works better with multiple schemas than dbs. Anything else?

thanks

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Aleksander Alekseev 2016-09-30 15:58:01 ZSON, PostgreSQL extension for compressing JSONB
Previous Message David G. Johnston 2016-09-30 15:45:32 Re: executing os commands from a function