<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"><channel><title>Scorpevans-Postgresql on Engineering Blog</title><link>https://engineering.adjust.com/tags/scorpevans-postgresql/</link><description>Recent content in Scorpevans-Postgresql on Engineering Blog</description><generator>Hugo -- gohugo.io</generator><language>en-us</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Feb 2023 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://engineering.adjust.com/tags/scorpevans-postgresql/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>Introducing a PgBouncer authentication layer into our database architecture</title><link>https://engineering.adjust.com/post/pgbouncer_authentication_layer/</link><pubDate>Mon, 13 Feb 2023 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://engineering.adjust.com/post/pgbouncer_authentication_layer/</guid><description>We recently decided to factor out PostgreSQL authentication into dedicated PgBouncers for different teams, and no longer allow direct remote access to the database cluster.
Apart from its main use as a connection pooler, we&amp;rsquo;ve realized that the isolation afforded by a PgBouncer layer simplifies the management of authentication and connection settings of the different client teams, and frees PostgreSQL of these mundane duties.
Motivations In the highly distributed and multi-tenant environment that our databases participate in, even seemingly minor issues easily bloat into an unsustainable mess.</description></item></channel></rss>