Re: Using tables in other PostGreSQL database

From: "Daniel Verite" <daniel(at)manitou-mail(dot)org>
To: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Using tables in other PostGreSQL database
Date: 2008-04-01 20:25:24
Message-ID: c3a9963a-1ec7-4fc1-af98-a92a1b47016b@mm
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Pettis, Barry wrote:

> So yes I use multiple databases. ( 4 of which are )
> 1. Lists all pats I manufacture ( includes general summary
information
> like cycle time, number of process', number of critical process',
number
> of metals used, etc... )
> 2. Lists all process steps at my site, and indicates if it is a
metal
> and which type, if it's a critical process or not, which functional
area
> said process resides )
> 3. Lists the substeps for a particular PROCESS STEP to determine how
> many internal steps there are to any given process ( this can be
> dependent on the part )
> 4. Lists IF a part has an "ENGINEERING" restriction to a particular
> tool and which tool part has to run on at a given Process Step.

So what you call a database is (I guess) an Access MDB file, either on
your local disk or accessible through a network share. MS-Access
provides an embedded database, but it can also access remote tables.
For those who don't know, an .MDB file is a big container that can have
tables, links to remote tables, forms, stored queries, vba code... The
links to remote tables can be :
1) client-server: by way of an ODBC connection to a database server.
The user needs to provides the connection information and the table
name.
2) by file. The user needs to provide the path of the remote .MDB file
(possibly on a network share) and the table name. I guess again that
this is the method you're using at the moment.
In both cases once the "link" to the remote tables are established, the
user can refer to them almost as if they were local (actually they have
a local name, as a soft link on a file system).
It's typical with MS-Access to separate data from the rest in order to
have an "application" part and a "data" part, each in its own MDB file.
It's crucial when the "data part" has to be shared or when you want the
ability to upgrade the "application" without touching the data.

Anyway, assuming I understood your setup, why is your data scattered
into 4 different databases? Not knowning anything about manufacturing I
don't understand your data, but still why not having different tables
into one .MDB file, as opposed to different .MDB files? And how does PG
enters the equation? You want to migrate all these data into it, or
just a part of them?

Regards,
--
Daniel
PostgreSQL-powered mail user agent and storage:
http://www.manitou-mail.org

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message sam 2008-04-01 20:34:44 Too many commands in a transaction
Previous Message Dimitri Fontaine 2008-04-01 20:17:17 Re: anyone have experience with using Talend ETL tool