I would still keep them in one database. My experience is that duplication of code (in this case tables) leads to maintaince headaches. Plus this way, you can backup/restore easily, and if necessary, once 5.0 comes out, you can use views per client to limit selects, I suppose...
My $0.02 Dan Greene > -----Original Message----- > From: robert_rowe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2004 12:48 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: When does using multiple databases make sense? > > > > In our accounting software our users can manage the books for > several different companies with the same program. As such I > have to keep a field (in every record) that designates which > company the given record is for and use it for report > filtering, lookups, etc. Had I used a different database for > each company then I would not need the overhead of this > field. We chose the company field over the multiple databases > because many of our clients are vertically integrated and do > cross charging (an entry from one company posts to another > company). This inter-company stuff is easy if the data is all > in one database but we always have to remember to filter by > the company field everywhere else. If I had it to do over > again I'd probably use multiple databases. > > -- > MySQL General Mailing List > For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql > To unsubscribe: > http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
