Thank you very much guys, I really appreciate your feedback and will think about your suggestions.
Josef Le 25 novembre 2016 à 17:29:20, Samuel Pelletier (sam...@samkar.com) a écrit: Josef, Personally, I use a single schema and connection to the database with the object representing the current tenant in the session and put all the fetch logic in that class that will add the required filtering qualifier. This way of doing things allow a single instance to easily serve multiple tenant and if there is shared objects they are not duplicated. This way will create a big database with big tables containing all the data for all tenants. The app and deployment setup are much simpler though. Others uses multiple connections or schema but it require some runtime tweaking of the model. This way seems more adapted to setup with separate instance for each tenant, the model tweaking is done on app startup for the complete life of the app. This way allow multiple instance of the database server and will split the load on multiple app and database instances. I do not see any real advantages of this way if all app instance connect to a single database unless there is other code that may connect directly to the data and there is no way to create filtering views for these needs. Depending on the number of tenant, the expected size of the data and number of concurrent users a method may be more adapted than the other. If a single is enough, my guess is the first way is enough. My own experience seem to indicate a 2012 Mac mini with a SSD can serve at least 300 concurrent users if the app is properly optimized with small sessions and page caches. I would expect more but never tried. Regards, Samuel Le 25 nov. 2016 à 11:07, Vanek Josef <josef.va...@intellicore.net> a écrit : Hi, We are developing a large website/REST solution for multiple customers. Ideally every customer shall have access only to their own data through ACLs or other mechanism. We have been thinking of Postgres' native schema management and use if for a multi-tenant solution. Has anyone implemented a Wonder's EOF extension that would be able to handle requests on the same connection but on a different scheme depending on some login configuration? If anyone has advice about the best practice for multi-tenancy DB architectures with WO that differs from our thoughts above, please respond There must be some people who have experimented with Wonder and multi-tenancy. Many thanks, Josef _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Webobjects-dev mailing list (Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/samuel%40samkar.com This email sent to sam...@samkar.com
_______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Webobjects-dev mailing list (Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to arch...@mail-archive.com
