On Tue, 2005-11-01 at 18:46 +0100, Philippe Ferreira wrote:
> >A way around this "explosion" of replication management would be to
> >join databases together.
> >
> >Rather than having 50 databases, each with one schema/namespace, you
> >might put them into one database with 50 schemas/namespaces.  That
> >would not require many clusters/slon processes.
> >  
> >
> 
> Hi Chistopher,
> 
> My goal was to isolate to the maximum each database, for :
>   - security (because these database are for public web sites, and 
> should be isolated from each other)

Restricting users to a specific schema is possible and practical. If you
want have each website use a different database user. You can even
change their search_path to use that schema by default.

>   - error tolerance/independance (to not put all my eggs in the same 
> basket, or "in the same cluster" !)

Unless you intend to use physically separate PostgreSQL daemons
operating on different ports, you have the same problem with both
configurations.

>   - scalability (for example, if I want to migrate *one* database from 
> one server to another...)

Assuming the schemas are used independently, this would not impact them
in the least. Dump a specific schema and move it to another server if
necessary.

> Is it possible to achieve this with several schemas/namespaces into one 
> only big database ?
> 
> 
> Thank you,
> Philippe Ferreira.
> _______________________________________________
> Slony1-general mailing list
> Slony1-general at gborg.postgresql.org
> http://gborg.postgresql.org/mailman/listinfo/slony1-general
> 
--