On 13 March 2018 at 13:12, Rajesh Mallah <mallah.raj...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I was not suggesting to use schemas in general for for accommodating > tenants. > Each tenant can reside in its own dedicated DB. > > When we use OFBiz as a part of some application that has other relational > data as well, then schema partitioning comes handy. > > Eg, The OFBiz data lies in its own schema say 'ofbiz' and the other > application data lies in another schema say 'general' or 'app' etc. it > makes utilizing > ofbiz.* and general.* tables easier. It allows close integration of > applications with > OFBiz. > > As far as other DBs are concerned that do not have same notion of schema, > the feature can be done on an optional basis (ie controlled by the args) , > i guess the current form of entityengine.xml is already doing it i.e, > handling diverse DBs and supporting (Pg) schema at the same time. > > Also the DBname specification is currently embedded in the jdbc_uri , if we > can have an option for specifying / overriding the 2 kinds of DBs > (org.apache.ofbiz > and org.apache.ofbiz.olap) while creating a tenant it shall allow to use > existing DBs. > > This shall be very handy for migrations / consolidation of DBs in > enterprise environments. > Hi Rajesh, OK, thanks. I agree it would be useful to have the database name as a separate logical thing rather than embedded in the URI. Integrating two applications and two schemas within one database might be the best. But managing permissions gets tricky - each application would have its own security management, and yet requires some access to the other application's data, even if read-only. It would be difficult to scale one application independently of the other using a cluster or some other technique. Have you considered using XML-RPC services instead? Cheers Paul Foxworthy -- Coherent Software Australia Pty Ltd PO Box 2773 Cheltenham Vic 3192 Australia Phone: +61 3 9585 6788 Web: http://www.coherentsoftware.com.au/ Email: i...@coherentsoftware.com.au
