On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 11:43 AM, Dave Newton <davelnew...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 12:39 PM, Brian Thompson <elephant...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>> Ever had a client that wanted/required their data segregated from
>>> everybody else's (this is not uncommon at all)? Ever wanted to
>> Apparently, it is uncommon. I've never encountered such a demand.
>
> That... makes it uncommon?!
Oh, right. That doesn't make it uncommon, that makes it almost unheard of.
(TBF, we're both speaking from biased samples -- but really, whether
data segregation is common or not is beside the point.)
>
>>> restrict tool access to data without jumping through any hoops
>>> ("here's the DB, here's your username/password, here's your data, and
>>> nobody else's")?
>> I haven't been in this type of situation, either. Projects I've
>> worked on have always had user-friendly reports on the data, and what
>> little we host for people hasn't called for constantly available
>> direct DB access.
>
> I work for companies with thousands of clients: there's no "little" we
> host for people, only "a lot".
>
> Dave
Most of our projects are deployed on a client's servers rather than
hosted internally. No big deal, just a different project environment.
-Brian
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscr...@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: user-h...@struts.apache.org
