Hey,
On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 8:50 AM, Berend Tober <[email protected]> wrote:
> I am wondering why all the LedgerSMB tables are not created in an
> application-specific namespace, rather than the PUBLIC schema?
>
I cannot answer that question, and I do enjoy schemas for separating
database entities, but...
> [....]
> So for instance some application that did a really good job in
> project management or some other complimentary-to-lsmb
> application domain could be integrated (a little more) easily
> with the financial system (than if separate data bases where used).
>
Does dblink not work fine for that? I mean, different schemas vs different
databases... dblink unites the different databases however you want. That
includes having different versions of postgresql, on different servers, all
'united' as one. I have dblink used in many databases... different
databases for different things. There are schemas as well, but not a
different schema for every app that I use together in the same database.
There are a number of reasons why I would not want that, but of course you
and I are different in that regard.
>
> A ledgersmb namespace to contain all the lsmb data base entities
> would be useful in this regard, I think, since there is only one
> PUBLIC namespace, and lsmb really has no special place in the
> universe to claim that as its home.
>
Well, I I were ledgersmb, I would CREATE a DATABASE as my home, and CREATE
at least one ROLE to access it. And of course would not mind dblinks in and
out :)
So while I agree with you about the schema ... that I would not mind such a
thing ... Just personally, I use postgresql for OTRS, Sympa, Dovecot,
Postfix and ledgerSMB ... and would not want to have them all in the same
database, regardless of if they could be or not. I do like to dblink them
together though, with my own 'virtual-user' DB in there as well.
>
> It would also help with regards to my other recent question (cf.
> "Data base sanity checks")
>
With regards to this, my 'sanity checks' for all my databases are in the
schema as CONSTRAINT's, or as RULE's or TRIGGER's .... that is an important
part of database design, to make sure it is 'sane'. That said, I am not
sure exactly what you want in this case. Just thought I would say my piece.
-- drewc
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Keep yourself connected to Go Parallel:
> INSIGHTS What's next for parallel hardware, programming and related areas?
> Interviews and blogs by thought leaders keep you ahead of the curve.
> http://goparallel.sourceforge.net
> _______________________________________________
> Ledger-smb-devel mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ledger-smb-devel
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keep yourself connected to Go Parallel:
INSIGHTS What's next for parallel hardware, programming and related areas?
Interviews and blogs by thought leaders keep you ahead of the curve.
http://goparallel.sourceforge.net
_______________________________________________
Ledger-smb-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ledger-smb-devel
