On 05/09/2017 07:03 PM, Armand Pirvu (home) wrote:
On May 9, 2017, at 7:11 PM, Adrian Klaver <adrian.klaver@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 05/09/2017 05:02 PM, armand pirvu wrote:
Well
Jt1 is prod and jt2 is dev
You are talking schemas, not databases, correct?
Correct
Before someone pushes to prod it does work in dev. The jdbc connection
That would concern me, as anything bad that happened in the dev schema could bring the entire database to its knees, including the prod schema.
How does data get into the prod schema if the connection is to the dev schema?
If you are a user in say category B you get to dev where you do your thing. If you deem okay you push to prod.
If you are a user in say category A you get to prod
routes to jt2. In the mean time it wad needed that some tables in prod are synced at all times from dev. Hence the view/fdw.
What I meant by connections was more to say the type of load or users doing something in each schema.
The issue being that if you are pushing data from jt2 --> jt1 you are also pushing the load in the same direction.
I see but short of using something like Slony in between the two schemas I don’t see a pretty simple choice
Create a separate dev database or cluster?
So my questions still remain
And about the plan from the fdw am I right or wrong ? I am inclined to say I am right based on the numbers in the timings
The timings where for a simple select. I am going to say doing something
that INSERTs/UPDATEs is going to be different. Still since a FDW
involves establishing another connection and passing data across it I
would say it is going to be less efficient.
Sent from my iPhone
On May 9, 2017, at 6:52 PM, Adrian Klaver <adrian.klaver@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:adrian.klaver@xxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
--
Adrian Klaver
adrian.klaver@xxxxxxxxxxx
--
Adrian Klaver
adrian.klaver@xxxxxxxxxxx
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
