What is that “choice”? Surely you aren’t like those yokels in the south that think a “militia” running in the woods can take on the the US military or even a decent SWAT force
On a semi related note, military leaders in the US have been warning about the dangers of the American deficit and have a long history of trying to cut waste by getting rid of weapons programs and military bases they don’t need but are constantly blocked by the civilian leadership in Congress because of the job loss.
This is explicitly not the problem they are trying to solve. In a single tenant database you don’t have to by definition worry about multi tenant databases
I guess the question then becomes, what problem does a multi-tenancy setup solve that an isolated database setup doesn't? Are they really not solving the same problem for a user perspective, or is it only from their own engineering perspective? And how do those decisions ultimately impact the product they can surface to users?
Off the top of my head, managing 100 different database instances takes a lot more work from the business standpoint than managing 1 database with 100 users.
The article also mentioned that they isolate by project_id. That implies one customer (assume a business) can isolate permissions more granulary.
With multi-tenant vs multi-database decision one driver would be the level of legal/compliance/risk/cost/resource drivers around how segregated users really are.
Multi-database is more expensive generally but is a more brain dead guaranteed way to ensure the users are properly segregated, resilient across cloud/database/etc software releases that may regress something in a multi-tenant setup.
Multi-tenant you always run the risk of a software update, misconfiguration or operational error exposing existence of other users / their metadata / their data / their usage / etc. You also have a lot more of a challenge engineering for resource contention.
In a system with organizations, projects and advanced user access permissions having separate databases doesn’t full solve the problem. You still need access control inside each tenanted database. It also makes cross-cutting queries impossible which means users can’t query across all their orgs for example.
The DSL approach has other advantages too: like rewriting queries to not expose underlying tables, doing automatic performance optimizations…
In my case, I am choosing to risk much smaller salaries, job anxiety and the pain of starting a new career from scratch rather than continue in software engineering. 20 years of professional experience, the few savings I have will go to buy a house in a lower-cost-of-living area in preparation of this huge life change (1+ years in the making)
Looking to get into solar/electrical engineering of some sort. The bonus is that I might return to enjoy coding for fun, without people reminding me every day that agentic is the future and I am being left behind. That and the state of hiring in this sector which is a hell of its own.
I think if this eventually happens, it would be a golden opportunity to hire the best talent at vastly reduces cost simply by giving such programmers a choice w.r.t LLM use.
Yes a company is going to put themselves at a disadvantage by moving slower than the rest of the industry or even being okay with an individual developer moving slower?
reply