MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <30b10437-647c-48c9-8bd8-0f45b4af2d7b@erinors.com>
 <CAKE1AiaoBZvtcM-ifUbgXYAJoxD-U0c1rq-s+eW9qQuB6jAYpA@mail.gmail.com> <2857958.1713733916@sss.pgh.pa.us>
In-Reply-To: <2857958.1713733916@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Dominique Devienne <ddevienne@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2024 09:33:09 +0200
Message-ID: <CAFCRh--7Oh2CFdAhqN-GXbGt63djxHN2SYLHUwt_MKcYZZuTKg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: query multiple schemas
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Steve Baldwin <steve.baldwin@gmail.com>, =?UTF-8?Q?Norbert_S=C3=A1ndor?= <sandor.norbert@erinors.com>, 
	pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000769bd60616be914f"
Archived-At: <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAFCRh--7Oh2CFdAhqN-GXbGt63djxHN2SYLHUwt_MKcYZZuTKg%40mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

--000000000000769bd60616be914f
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sun, Apr 21, 2024 at 11:12=E2=80=AFPM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote=
:

> Steve Baldwin <steve.baldwin@gmail.com> writes:
> > If the number of tenant schemas is reasonably static, you could write a
> > plpgsql function to create a set of UNION ALL views
>
> Another idea is to build a partitioned table
>

Hi Norbert. I asked a [similar question][1] a while back,
and unfortunately didn't get any actionable input, perhaps
because I already mentioned in my message the options
proposed here so far. Seems like people like us, using a
dynamic number of schemas, are outliers in database-land.

In my case, the revision/version of the schema could be
different as well, which would complicate the partitioning idea.

In any case, I'm interested in what works well for you.
And if/when I get back to this issue myself, I'll do the same.

Thanks, --DD

[1]: https://postgrespro.com/list/thread-id/2673517

--000000000000769bd60616be914f
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div dir=3D"ltr">On Sun, Apr 21, 2024 at 11:12=E2=80=AFPM =
Tom Lane &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us">tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us</a>&gt;=
 wrote:<br></div><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quot=
e" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204)=
;padding-left:1ex">Steve Baldwin &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:steve.baldwin@gmail.=
com" target=3D"_blank">steve.baldwin@gmail.com</a>&gt; writes:<br>
&gt; If the number of tenant schemas is reasonably static, you could write =
a<br>
&gt; plpgsql function to create a set of UNION ALL views<br>
<br>
Another idea is to build a partitioned table<br></blockquote><div><br></div=
><div>Hi Norbert. I asked a [similar question][1] a while back,</div><div>a=
nd unfortunately didn&#39;t get any actionable input, perhaps</div><div>bec=
ause I already mentioned in my message the options</div><div>proposed here =
so far. Seems like people like us, using a</div><div>dynamic number of sche=
mas, are outliers in database-land.</div><div><br></div><div>In my case, th=
e revision/version of the schema could be</div><div>different as well, whic=
h would complicate the partitioning idea.</div><div><br></div><div>In any c=
ase, I&#39;m interested in what works well for you.</div><div>And if/when I=
 get back to this issue myself, I&#39;ll do the same.</div><div><br></div><=
div>Thanks, --DD</div><div><br></div><div>[1]: <a href=3D"https://postgresp=
ro.com/list/thread-id/2673517">https://postgrespro.com/list/thread-id/26735=
17</a>=C2=A0</div></div></div>

--000000000000769bd60616be914f--