Further to: Support for additional multi-tenancy models? I wondered whether there is a preference for one multi-tenancy approach over another? I’m aware that for some customers separate schemas is a must-have feature but it also significantly increases the overhead of managing an install.
What are you thoughts? Do you see both approaches continuing in parallel?
We have seen demand for both approaches, so it probably will continue to be developed in parallel. Separate schemas definitely has significant overhead in a lot of areas including performance, database maintenance and complexity. When you have the choice then having multiple tenants in the same database is often the easier solution.
Cheers Tijs, good to know
From what I understand Flowable 6 supports two approaches for Multitenancy- ‘Shared Database Single Engine’ and ‘Multi-Schema Single Engine’
Does it also support the Multi-Engine approach?