Correct, that's how most do it. dblink is an option, but I have no
experience to share on that. Just from a straight design PoV though,
the complete opacity of a dblink table in terms of size, selectivity,
indexes, etc, means that you'll have to be pretty careful about what
use cases you try and push through that pipe -- it's not a
transparent gateway, it's more of a straw.
P
On 13-Aug-07, at 7:02 AM, John Smith wrote:
given this:
- cluster
-- database
--- schema (except public schema can be accessed from outside)
---- table, function etc
it means (and i didn't want to accept this conclusion) most postgis
shops have 1 kick-ass database for all their geom and related non-geom
tables separated by named schemas. users, permissions etc are all
restricted by these named schemas and *all* geom tables are contained
in this monster database (to avoid duplication).
well that'll certainly ease administration :).
On 8/11/07, Paul Ramsey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
In what respect do you find that postgis doesn't support multiple
schemas? We generally install postgis in 'public.' and create lots
http://postgis.refractions.net/pipermail/postgis-users/2006-January/
010602.html
jzs
On 8/11/07, Paul Ramsey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 10-Aug-07, at 2:05 PM, John Smith wrote:
postgresql doesn't support queries across multiple databases and
postgis doesn't support multiple schemas, so how'd you guys do it?\\
In what respect do you find that postgis doesn't support multiple
schemas? We generally install postgis in 'public.' and create lots
of other schemas ('foo.', 'water.', 'etc.') for our data tables.
P
_______________________________________________
postgis-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-users
_______________________________________________
postgis-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-users
