> "Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD" <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at> writes:
>>>> My feeling is that we need not support tablespaces on OS's without
>> To create symlinked directories on Win2k NTFS see:
>> I think Win2000 or XP would be a reasonable restriction for Win32 PG
>> installations that want tablespaces.
> Oh, good --- symlinks for directories are all that we need for this
> design. I think that settles it then.
What archival tools are there that would restore this to this back to the
filesystem: tar? zip? What would happen if a symlink were removed or
pointed to an invalid location while the postmaste was running?
I think the catalog approach would future proof yourself; think about the
possibility of new filesystems, table storage mechanisms, or devices.
There may be a raw disk system in the future. With that you could point
to a block device instead of a filesystem directory. Symlinks seem like a
simple solution but will it be complete enough? A meta file or catalog
entry could store more than just the location of the tablespace: max/min
space allocation, vacuum frequencies, storage type (maybe in-place
updates), locking schemes (in case someome had a wild hair to customize
That meta/configuration file with a summary or one that is generated for a
summary could be useful.
I just can't help but state that "I've got a bad feeling about this."
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Chris Browne||Date: 2004-03-04 18:01:11|
|Subject: Issue with 7.1.3 - regressions and such|
|Previous:||From: Fabien COELHO||Date: 2004-03-04 17:06:21|
|Subject: A plan to improve error messages with context, hint and details.|
pgsql-hackers-win32 by date
|Next:||From: Bruce Momjian||Date: 2004-03-04 18:18:47|
|Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Tablespaces|
|Previous:||From: Thomas Swan||Date: 2004-03-04 06:39:29|
|Subject: Re: Tablespaces|