X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C6819DD622 for ; Sat, 25 Feb 2006 12:03:05 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 04483-07 for ; Sat, 25 Feb 2006 12:03:03 -0400 (AST) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from mx1.surnet.cl (mx1.surnet.cl [216.155.73.180]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C11C59DD620 for ; Sat, 25 Feb 2006 12:03:02 -0400 (AST) Received: from unknown (HELO cluster.surnet.cl) ([216.155.73.165]) by mx1.surnet.cl with ESMTP; 25 Feb 2006 13:24:38 -0300 X-IronPort-AV: i="4.02,145,1139194800"; d="scan'208"; a="41167004:sNHT29330812" Received: from alvh.no-ip.org (201.221.201.125) by cluster.surnet.cl (7.0.043) (authenticated as alvherre@surnet.cl) id 43A978FD0083DCB1; Sat, 25 Feb 2006 13:03:01 -0300 Received: by alvh.no-ip.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id EE32EC2C2DD; Sat, 25 Feb 2006 13:03:00 -0300 (CLST) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 13:03:00 -0300 From: Alvaro Herrera To: Eric Lauzon Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Schema vs Independant Databases, ACLS,Overhead,pg_hba.conf Message-ID: <20060225160300.GD4756@surnet.cl> Mail-Followup-To: Eric Lauzon , pgsql-performance@postgresql.org References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11+cvs20060126 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.577 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.342, DNS_FROM_RFC_ABUSE=0.479, DNS_FROM_RFC_POST=1.44] X-Spam-Score: 1.577 X-Spam-Level: * X-Archive-Number: 200602/408 X-Sequence-Number: 17394 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.