On 22 May 2012 18:18, Josh Berkus <j...@agliodbs.com> wrote: > >> 1. Ability to have a Role that can only access one Database >> >> 2. Allow user info to be dumped with a database, to make a db >> completely self-consistent >> >> 3. Allow databases to be transportable >> >> 4. Allow users to access tables in >1 database easily, with appropriate >> rights. > > The last requirement seems completely contradictory to the other three. > Either we're trying to make databases even more isolated as > multi-tenant Catalogs, or we're not. Trying to do both at the same time > is failure-by-design.
Why is it OK to allow somebody to access multiple schema in one query, but not multiple databases? Are you arguing that schemas are also broken? I see no failure by design. I see an idea for greater ease of use being discussed. > Given that we offer schema as an alternative to multiple databases, and > users are starting to get used to them, I think that requirement (4) is > just a bad idea, and not worth pursuing, Personally, I have long recommended that people use schemas. But people do use databases and when they do they are pretty much screwed. I brought this up as a way of improving our ease of use. > except in the context of pgsql_fdw. That is not a realistic option. -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
