Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: [HACKERS] Tablespaces

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: jearl(at)bullysports(dot)com
Cc: "Thomas Swan" <tswan(at)idigx(dot)com>,"Bruce Momjian" <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>,"Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD" <zeugswettera(at)spardat(dot)at>,"Greg Stark" <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org,"PostgreSQL Win32 port list" <pgsql-hackers-win32(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Tablespaces
Date: 2004-03-06 06:13:58
Message-ID: 14449.1078553638@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-hackers-win32
[ lots of opinions about depending on symlinks for tablespaces ]

One thing that I think hasn't been noted in this thread is that our
initial implementation won't bind us forever.  If it becomes clear that
a symlink-based implementation has real problems, we can change it.
But if we spend extra effort to avoid symlinks from the start, we will
never know whether that effort was justified or wasted.

We have enough work to do to make tablespaces happen that I feel we
should take the path of least resistance to start with.  I do not think
it would cost us much wasted effort if the decision proves out wrong.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: John SiracusaDate: 2004-03-07 02:29:27
Subject: Re: Feature request: smarter use of conditional indexes
Previous:From: David GaramondDate: 2004-03-06 05:26:03
Subject: Re: Sigh, 7.3.6 rewrap not right

pgsql-hackers-win32 by date

Next:From: Magnus HaganderDate: 2004-03-07 13:22:21
Subject: Re: APC + socket restrictions under Win32?
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2004-03-05 23:56:33
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Another crack at doing a Win32

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group