From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
To: Eric Lauzon <eric.lauzon@abovesecurity.com>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Schema vs Independant Databases, ACLS,Overhead,pg_hba.conf
Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 13:03:00 -0300
Message-ID: <20060225160300.GD4756@surnet.cl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <F7B73864DD39FA40B6C56B3CE0D4D1CBF00F5B@asdc003.abovesecurite.lan>
References: <F7B73864DD39FA40B6C56B3CE0D4D1CBF00F5B@asdc003.abovesecurite.lan>
Eric Lauzon wrote:
Hi,
> Now that the issue is that we can't implement a per connection user/ACL
> pair , would it be a good idea to implement
> Schema ACLS and mabey pg_hba.conf Schema acls
This is certainly possible to do using GRANT and REVOKE on the schemas;
no need to fool with pg_hba.conf. You can of course create groups/roles
to simplify the assignment of privileges, as needed.
Apart from the much more efficient queries (i.e. using cross-schema
queries instead of dblink), I don't think you're going to see much
change in performance, because most things like WAL and shared buffers
are shared among all databases anyway. You'd save a bit by not having
multiple copies of system caches (pg_class cache, etc), but I wouldn't
know if that's going to be very noticeable next to the primary
improvement.
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: alvherre@commandprompt.com, eric.lauzon@abovesecurity.com
Subject: Re: Schema vs Independant Databases, ACLS,Overhead,pg_hba.conf
In-Reply-To: <20060225160300.GD4756@surnet.cl>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox