Torben Nehmer wrote:
> I prefer to have the information for my customers in different
> Databases so that there's no chance at all they can get to the tables
> of the others. Also it makes per-user Backup easier, which is important
> for my accounting. In addition on a crash there is a smaller chance
> that every database is corrupted if anything goes really wrong.
OK, understood.
> > Yes. You use MidgardPageDatabase for that. Well, you use the pagedb
> > for the admin site; user information is in the users' private
> > database.
>
> Errr... Stop.
> I don't get this :-(
>
> What I did is that I created a new, independant database with the
> midgard-data Package for my test scenario. Then I assigned the
> different Databases with "MidgardDatabase db-xy user password" in the
> virtual host configurations, using different Databases for each one,
> not separating between user- or page databases.
Oh, so you loaded the admin site in the users' database? That works,
of course. With the pagedb you can put the (an) admin site in one
database, to be used by all users, and the user data in their private
database. But there's no need to use the pagedb, you can set up
Midgard as usual and just use the normal configuration, which will
utilize the efficient database handling as long as you minimize
the number of unique username/password combinations.
> I think I don't really understand the possibilities of the multiDB
> System...
The above is about all the extra you get. Shared databases that will
be read-only that hosts an application like the admin site.
> Asgard should be usable for my customers.
It will be if you load it into their private database. I honestly hadn't
thought of that.
Emile
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
