On 9/29/2016 2:25 PM, Venkata B Nagothi wrote:
Since, you are saying there could be thousands of tenants, going for single-database-per-tenant could possibly end up in a very bad and complex database design.
worse, it would also require each tenant to have unique connections, making connection pooling a nightmare.
depending on the nature of the application, its data isolation requirements, and how much per-tenant customization there is, assuming the customers('tenants') aren't directly accessing SQL, I could see many scenarios with ONE database+schema, and 'tenant' is just a field that qualifies queries. From a pure performance standpoint, this likely woudl be the most efficient, as 1000s of schemas with 100s of tables each == 100s of 1000s of tables, which means massive bloat of the postgres catalog, and also makes caching less effective.
-- john r pierce, recycling bits in santa cruz -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
