Timeline for Multi-tenancy - single database vs multiple database
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 18, 2013 at 12:36 | comment | added | Yashvit | If we use multiple schemas, using EF Code First will it be possible to migrate all the schemas to the latest version after the system goes live? | |
| Mar 24, 2012 at 17:46 | comment | added | jmoreno | @RichardW1001: depends. you can do dynamic SQL in the sp, in order to make it generic, but that of course depends upon them having at least somewhat similar structure. A possible alternative for dynamic sql, would be Synonyms, unfortunately, as I understand them, they are system wide and not contained within a transaction, so not suitable for concurrent usage with different values. | |
| Mar 24, 2012 at 10:36 | comment | added | RichardW1001 | There's an existing data access layer that uses a lot of stored procedures - 190 tables, 5 code-generated procedures per table, plus some custom ones - while the medium term goal is to introduce Entity Framework, would there be a need to replicate the stored procedures for each schema? | |
| Mar 23, 2012 at 21:52 | comment | added | jfrankcarr | And hopefully you avoid the trap of having columns like CustomField1 through CustomField30 and/or having tables like Budget, BudgetEx, BudgetCustom, BudgetCustomerName, BudgetAnotherCustomerName, etc. | |
| Mar 23, 2012 at 21:38 | comment | added | brian | +1 This will also allow you to avoid having to configure MSDTC and take on the associated overhead (two phase commits) | |
| Mar 23, 2012 at 21:22 | history | answered | HLGEM | CC BY-SA 3.0 |