On 22 May 2012 18:56, Josh Berkus <j...@agliodbs.com> wrote: > I'm not arguing that we don't have users who would like interdatabase > queries, especially when they port applications from MySQL or MSSQL. We > have a lot of such users.
Lots and lots, yes. > However, we *also* have a lot of users who > would like to treat separate databases as virtual private instances of > Postgres, and there's no way to satisfy both goals. We have to choose > one route or the other. That's only true if you try to satisfy both goals at once, which I'm not suggesting. So I believe that proposition to be false. However, given sufficient people speaking against it, I'll leave this idea. Though I'd suggest that people on this thread spend a little quality time with FDWs. It's a great direction but there's a long way to go yet. Sorry to Laurenz, who's done a great job so far on the Oracle FDW. > I personally see the isolation case as the more necessary because there > are several workarounds for the "inter-database queries" issue I also want that, per my original post. > An alternative idea -- and one which could be deployed a lot faster -- > is to come up with a tool which makes it easy to migrate an entire > database into a separate schema or set of schemas in an existing > database. And improvements to manage schema visility/path better, I > suppose. Yes, it is possible to improve things there also. -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
