| From: | "Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD" <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at> |
|---|---|
| To: | "mlw" <markw(at)mohawksoft(dot)com>, <jim(at)buttafuoco(dot)net> |
| Cc: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "pgsql-hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Storage Location Patch Proposal for V7.3 |
| Date: | 2001-11-08 07:24:31 |
| Message-ID: | 46C15C39FEB2C44BA555E356FBCD6FA41EB3F8@m0114.s-mxs.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> Since "tablespace" is not part of the SQL standard, maybe it makes
sense to
> define a more specific syntax. The term "location" makes sense,
because it is
> not a tablespace as Oracle defines it.
It *is* an "OS managed tablespace" in terms of IBM DB2.
Methinks the term "TABLESPACE" is perfect for PostgreSQL.
The fact whether it is a directory, a file or even a raw device
depends on how you create the tablespace.
The point is, that the syntax for "create table" and "create index"
can be compatible in this case, imho without confusing many.
Not the "create tablespace" syntax, but that is imho not an issue.
Andreas
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Martín Marqués | 2001-11-08 12:02:11 | Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL v7.2b2 Released |
| Previous Message | mlw | 2001-11-08 04:49:49 | Re: Storage Location Patch Proposal for V7.3 |