[LRUG] Multi-tenanting

[Riccardo Tacconi]

Hello,

You should keep your target customers, in enterprise apps you have to have
a different database per account and even separated queues (like RabbitMQ
queues) too.

If your app is not too serious, as you say, may be you could have a layer
where every query has to pass an account_id in order to retrieve data.

On 25 February 2016 at 09:24, Michael Pavling <pavling at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hiya,
>
> I'm looking at the ways I can have multiple users share an app, but
> keep all their data separate.
>
> Now, I suppose the first way is to just make sure all queries are
> scoped to the user (and keep fingers crossed that no future me ever
> writes an unscoped `Order.all`). But there's *got* to be a range of
> good ways.
>
> Looking at multi-tenanting gems, they seem to either take the approach
> of scoping for you, or creating separate DBs/schemas for each tenant.
> Does anyone have any opinion on the pros and cons of the different
> approaches, or indeed, the specific gems?
>
> I'm leaning toward the "scope for me" approach, because it seems
> simplest to grok - and the app isn't *that* serious (although thinking
> about it... there is risk of personally identifying data being stored,
> so I probably should prioritise a secure approach).
>
> Michael
> _______________________________________________
> Chat mailing list
> Chat at lists.lrug.org
> Archives: http://lists.lrug.org/pipermail/chat-lrug.org
> Manage your subscription: http://lists.lrug.org/options.cgi/chat-lrug.org
> List info: http://lists.lrug.org/listinfo.cgi/chat-lrug.org
>



-- 
Riccardo Tacconi

http://github.com/rtacconi
http://twitter.com/rtacconi
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.lrug.org/pipermail/chat-lrug.org/attachments/20160225/a01219e1/attachment-0002.html>