Re: DBO Schema
- From: Erland Sommarskog <esquel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2007 14:23:27 -0800
Mitch (Mitch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) writes:
In this case, there will be one database user, but there will also be
about 700 tables. I was thinking it would be useful to have related
tables grouped into different schemas to give a visual relation at first
glance.
So was your question aksed from a security perspective, or from a
modularisation perspective?
Yes, with 700 tables multiple schemas can be a good idea, as it may
make the data model easier to understand and approach.
Also, another advantage with using different schemas, is that it
becomes natural to always use two-part notation. There are situations
where this improves performance.
Also, the user now has db_owner role, but I really don't think it needs to
have more than read/write.
I suppose this single database user will be a proxy for a lot of real
users? Yes, this user should definitely not have more rights than
necessary. Ideally, you should use stored procedures and all the
user would need is execution rights on the schemas. If you need to
use dynamic SQL in some places, this is best addressed with signing
these particular procedures with certificate.
--
Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, esquel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Books Online for SQL Server 2005 at
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/2005/downloads/books.mspx
Books Online for SQL Server 2000 at
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodinfo/previousversions/books.mspx
.
- References:
- Re: DBO Schema
- From: Laurentiu Cristofor [MSFT]
- Re: DBO Schema
- From: Erland Sommarskog
- Re: DBO Schema
- Prev by Date: Re: DBO Schema
- Next by Date: Re: Permissions on views
- Previous by thread: Re: DBO Schema
- Next by thread: Re: Permissions on views
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|
