[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Why no LedgerSMB name space


On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 8:50 AM, Berend Tober <..hidden..> wrote:
I am wondering why all the LedgerSMB tables are not created in an
application-specific namespace, rather than the PUBLIC schema?

I cannot answer that question, and I do enjoy schemas for separating database entities, but... 
So for instance some application that did a really good job in
project management or some other complimentary-to-lsmb
application domain could be integrated (a little more) easily
with the financial system (than if separate data bases where used).

Does dblink not work fine for that? I mean, different schemas vs different databases... dblink unites the different databases however you want. That includes having different versions of postgresql, on different servers, all 'united' as one. I have dblink used in many databases... different databases for different things. There are schemas as well, but not a different schema for every app that I use together in the same database. There are a number of reasons why I would not want that, but of course you and I are different in that regard. 

A ledgersmb namespace to contain all the lsmb data base entities
would be useful in this regard, I think, since there is only one
PUBLIC namespace, and lsmb really has no special place in the
universe to claim that as its home.

Well, I I were ledgersmb, I would CREATE a DATABASE as my home, and CREATE at least one ROLE to access it. And of course would not mind dblinks in and out :)

So while I agree with you about the schema ... that I would not mind such a thing ... Just personally, I use postgresql for OTRS, Sympa, Dovecot, Postfix and ledgerSMB ... and would not want to have them all in the same database, regardless of if they could be or not. I do like to dblink them together though, with my own 'virtual-user' DB in there as well.

It would also help with regards to my other recent question (cf.
"Data base sanity checks")

With regards to this, my 'sanity checks' for all my databases are in the schema as CONSTRAINT's, or as RULE's or TRIGGER's .... that is an important part of database design, to make sure it is 'sane'. That said, I am not sure exactly what you want in this case. Just thought I would say my piece.

-- drewc

Keep yourself connected to Go Parallel:
INSIGHTS What's next for parallel hardware, programming and related areas?
Interviews and blogs by thought leaders keep you ahead of the curve.
Ledger-smb-devel mailing list