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.
Well, to answer your original question, I personally would not see your general idea as useful at all. I admin 9 or 10 PostgreSQL servers currently and have never run across a need, or even a desire, to do what you are doing. In fact, if there's any general demand, it's to go the opposite way: patches to lock down the system tables and prevent switching databases to support ISPs and other shared-hosting situations. For an immediate solution to what you are encountering, have you looked at pgPool? -- --Josh Josh Berkus Aglio Database Solutions San Francisco ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
