Mailing-List: contact user-help@couchdb.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: user@couchdb.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of kurt@arstechnica.com designates
 207.97.245.171 as permitted sender)
From: Kurt Mackey <kurt@arstechnica.com>
To: "user@couchdb.apache.org" <user@couchdb.apache.org>
Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 14:16:36 -0600
Subject: Re: Considerations for lots and lots of databases?
Thread-Topic: Considerations for lots and lots of databases?
Thread-Index: AclzT13Nniu+6+fpRdat6ALHvMQrSQAEPiR8
Message-ID: <C58E5E44.14932%kurt@arstechnica.com>
In-Reply-To: <2D2F5D7F-FAC7-44C9-A43C-C6135AADC743@gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="_000_C58E5E4414932kurtarstechnicacom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0

--_000_C58E5E4414932kurtarstechnicacom_
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Probably something Ruby based.  I'm currently poking at Rails + RelaxDB.


On 1/10/09 12:15 PM, "Flinn Mueller" <theflinnster@gmail.com> wrote:

Kurt, what language/framework are you planning to use for the project?

On Jan 10, 2009, at 12:19 PM, Kurt Mackey wrote:

> I really, really like not having to deal with schema updates.  Given
> that I don't have to worry about this in quite the same way with
> Couch, I've been wondering what the downsides are to splitting data
> into multiple databases on a SaaS project.  The idea is that each
> account/customer would get their own database, rather than simply
> marking documents with an "owner".
>
> Now, the obvious downside is that it makes it more difficult to do
> cross-customer queries.  But what other problems are there with this
> idea?  Assuming that there were lots and lots and lots of accounts,
> what performance implications are there to giving each their own DB
> rather than making them all share?
>
> -Kurt


--_000_C58E5E4414932kurtarstechnicacom_--