Hi there, I'd like to get some input on the following design approach.
I am creating a service where I have to save the customer's device logs. Every customer can have more than one device and every device can have as many as 5M records over a period of month or so. Having a single table to store all the customer's logs didn't seem to work because when the device is removed and the logs have to be deleted the table gets locked for a while. So I came up with an alternative solution (haven't implemented yet) and that is to have a table per customer device. In this case, I just drop the table to remove the device log records. But then I thought why not create a database per customer, and a table per customer device? This isolate things even more between customers. My question is, is this a good idea? Am I missing something? If this approach is fine. How would I go on creating the dynamic table names and bind the declarative class to the table name? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sqlalchemy" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sqlalchemy/-/0mQ_gVePnSMJ. To post to this group, send email to sqlalchemy@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sqlalchemy+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sqlalchemy?hl=en.
