How would that be different from a user, then? In other words, why not just split the innodb buffer pool by the user id (which, BTW, would require a major overhaul of InnoDB...)?
What I'm asking is what would be the benefits of one more level of taxonomy when the user ID already allows for such categorization? Cheers! jay On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 12:05 PM, Brian Aker <[email protected]> wrote: > Think multi-tenancy. A user can create as many schemas as they like, and I > can split the innodb pool up per catalog. > > Cheers, > --Brian > > On Mar 19, 2010, at 8:52 AM, Jay Pipes <[email protected]> wrote: > >> NULL. >> >> I actually don't think catalogs are all that useful, FWIW... >> >> -jay >> >> On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 9:47 PM, Roland Bouman <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> >>> Hi! >>> >>> On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 11:25 PM, Brian Aker <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> Do we want to just default the value to NULL? >>> >>> SQL standard says it should be NULL in case there is no support for >>> catalogs. >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Roland Bouman >>> http://rpbouman.blogspot.com/ >>> >>> Author of "Pentaho Solutions: Business Intelligence and Data >>> Warehousing with Pentaho and MySQL", >>> http://www.wiley.com/WileyCDA/WileyTitle/productCd-0470484322.html >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss >>> Post to : [email protected] >>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss >>> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp >>> > _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
