THE ZEPINT NETWORKprogrammer assist |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Multiple Databases v/s Single Modified DatabaseDiggBlinkRedditDeliciousTechnoratiquestion by mamadlin | Moderate I read the article by Srirangan about multiple dbs (thanks for the to-the-point article, btw), but I have a general question, if you have a rails app, that for instance serves one system (company, soccer team, or whatever) and it has its own db, and works just fine. Re: Multiple Databases v/s Single Modified Databasereply by Srirangan I would personally use multiple databases to keep them seperate, however, depending on your situation/environment to use a single database with different prefixes for different companies would also be an option. Re: Multiple Databases v/s Single Modified Databasereply by spike We used multiple databases and hijacked them for our CMS application. It worked well but there are caveats when working with sessions. If you store your sessions in the database, all the session data will be lost as soon as somone hits a site that switches the database. It seems that the sessions recording etc... is done before application.rb boots up. We switched to memcache (memcached) and it works fantastically. It even makes our app more flexible in the future when we span multiple machines. Got a Ruby Question?Just Sign Up and ask the top Ruby experts! |
Ruby Experts
Leading Experts
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Copyright © 2007 Programmer Assist. All rights reserved. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||