This page is not created by, affiliated with, or supported by Slack Technologies, Inc.
2023-11-29
Channels
- # adventofcode (1)
- # announcements (2)
- # beginners (163)
- # biff (3)
- # calva (19)
- # cider (56)
- # cljs-dev (5)
- # clojure (43)
- # clojure-belgium (2)
- # clojure-europe (47)
- # clojure-norway (32)
- # clojure-uk (2)
- # clojurescript (24)
- # datomic (5)
- # events (1)
- # fulcro (2)
- # hoplon (11)
- # hyperfiddle (12)
- # jobs (1)
- # lsp (15)
- # malli (7)
- # music (1)
- # polylith (2)
- # re-frame (7)
- # reagent (7)
- # shadow-cljs (25)
- # specter (9)
- # squint (16)
- # xtdb (5)
Hi, we’re currently using XTDB 1 backed by Postgresql for everything. We need to store a lot of data from an external datasource now that wouldn’t benefit from immutability/bitemporality. Is there any argument against storing this data in different tables in the same Postgresql DB, or would it be better to say that the whole DB is owned/managed by XTDB and store other stuff in a separate Postgresql DB?
Hey @UDQE4G9B2 - I agree that different schemas within the same Postgres instance should work fine 🙂
Hey there! We don't bother with different schemas - the tx_events table is pretty evident among the others - what are the benefits of schemas apart from separation of concerns?
isolated backup & restore is my first thought (e.g. https://stackoverflow.com/questions/12564777/how-do-i-do-a-schema-only-backup-and-restore-in-postgresql), and maybe it's a useful barrier from a security perspective, but it's far from essential