Re: Open Items

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Open Items
Date: 2004-10-18 00:31:20
Message-ID: 15028.1098059480@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> o remove non-portable TABLESPACE clause from CREATE TABLE and
> use a new default_tablespace SET variable

I'm coming around to the conclusion that this is simply a bad idea.

The problem with having such a SET variable is that it plays hob with
the existing definition about where schemas and tables get a default
tablespace from. Which source wins (the database or schema default
tablespace, or the SET variable)? And why? The only really clean way
to have a SET variable for this is to forget about schema- or
table-based defaults. Do we want to do that? (Hey, it'd solve the
problem with schema tablespaces being droppable, because there wouldn't
*be* any such thing as a schema's tablespace anymore. But on the whole
this seems like a step backward in usability.)

What we might want to do is invent a --notablespace option for pg_dump,
comparable to --noowner, to let someone make a dump that contains no
TABLESPACE clauses.

regards, tom lane

In response to

  • Open Items at 2004-10-17 19:07:33 from Bruce Momjian

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Gavin Sherry 2004-10-18 01:08:12 Re: Open Items
Previous Message Gaetano Mendola 2004-10-18 00:22:08 Re: [HACKERS] Getting rid of AtEOXact Buffers (was Re: [Testperf-general]