Re: Table spaces again [was Re: Threaded Sorting]

From: Hans-Jürgen Schönig <postgres(at)cybertec(dot)at>
To: shridhar_daithankar(at)persistent(dot)co(dot)in, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Table spaces again [was Re: Threaded Sorting]
Date: 2002-10-07 13:52:54
Message-ID: 3DA191B6.904@cybertec.at
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

>
>
>Can anybody please tell me in detail.(Not just a pointing towards TODO items)
>
>1) What a table space supposed to offer?
>

They allow you to define a maximum amount of storage for a certain set
of data.
They help you to define the location of data.
They help you to define how much data can be used by which ressource.

>2) What a directory structure does not offer that table space does?
>

You need to the command line in order to manage quotas - you might not
want that.
Quotas are handled differently on ever platform (if available).
With tablespaces you can assign 30mb to use a, 120mb to user b etc. ...
Table spaces are a nice abstraction layer to the file system.

>
>3) How do they compare for advantages/disadvantages..
>
>Oracle familiarity is out. That's not even close to being good merit IMO. If
>postgresql moves to oracle way of doing things, .. well, I won't be as much
>hapy as I am now..
>
>Thanks for your patience..
>

how would you handle table spaces? just propose it to the hackers' list ...
we should definitely discuss that ...
a bad implementation of table spaces would be painful ...

Hans

--
*Cybertec Geschwinde u Schoenig*
Ludo-Hartmannplatz 1/14, A-1160 Vienna, Austria
Tel: +43/1/913 68 09; +43/664/233 90 75
www.postgresql.at <http://www.postgresql.at>, cluster.postgresql.at
<http://cluster.postgresql.at>, www.cybertec.at
<http://www.cybertec.at>, kernel.cybertec.at <http://kernel.cybertec.at>

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Manfred Koizar 2002-10-07 14:10:26 Re: Large databases, performance
Previous Message Shridhar Daithankar 2002-10-07 13:46:00 Re: Implicit Lock Row