On 12/06/2010 04:41 AM, John R Pierce wrote:
If you want that level of isolation, you have to give each user his own
cluster.
as postgresql is currently structured, yes, and further, each cluster
needs its own listener port which is, IMHO, rather ugly.
My idea of adding an 'instance' layer al
If you want that level of isolation, you have to give each user his own
cluster.
as postgresql is currently structured, yes, and further, each cluster
needs its own listener port which is, IMHO, rather ugly.
The amount of work needed to get rid of that small bit of ugliness seems
far out of pr
John R Pierce writes:
> On 12/05/10 12:27 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> If you want that level of isolation, you have to give each user his own
>> cluster.
> as postgresql is currently structured, yes, and further, each cluster
> needs its own listener port which is, IMHO, rather ugly.
The amount of w
On 12/05/10 12:27 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
John R Pierce writes:
one of the reasons PostgreSQL is less popular with shared hosting
services is that there is insufficient isolation between database
users. For instance, one user leaves a pending
due to sloppy programming, and the entire cluster even
John R Pierce writes:
> one of the reasons PostgreSQL is less popular with shared hosting
> services is that there is insufficient isolation between database
> users. For instance, one user leaves a pending
> due to sloppy programming, and the entire cluster eventually can't be
> vacuumed.
one of the reasons PostgreSQL is less popular with shared hosting
services is that there is insufficient isolation between database
users. For instance, one user leaves a pending
due to sloppy programming, and the entire cluster eventually can't be
vacuumed. There's numerous other places wh
