RE: Status of new relation file naming

From: "Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev(at)SECTORBASE(dot)COM>
To: "'Zeugswetter Andreas SB'" <ZeugswetterA(at)wien(dot)spardat(dot)at>, "'hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org'" <hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: RE: Status of new relation file naming
Date: 2000-09-14 17:08:40
Message-ID: 8F4C99C66D04D4118F580090272A7A23018CC2@SECTORBASE1
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Rename... Why would we need in rename with OID filenames?
Ok, let's start with OID (*without tablename prefix|suffix*) filenames
and we'll see later how it will work.

So, could someone implement OID filenames?
(Please use RelFileNode structure).

Vadim

> > > You have to tell us whether you plan to implement
> > > a safe file rename in WAL ? If yes a simple filename
> > > without version would be possible and better.
> >
> > What do you mean?
>
> The previous discussion we had where we concluded, that
> an os rename of a file cannot be done without risc.
> But that risc was imho acceptable to avoid the extra version
> in the filename
>
> (a rename back to the old name could fail when the tx is supposed
> to be rolled back).
>
> Search the archive for "file rename sync".
>
> My conlusion would be an oid only filename, or a mixture of
> oid and tablename, where tablename can be wildcarded on a
> directory search,
> since oid is already unique. No version in the name, we would
> do renames in
> that case.
>
> If I remember correctly a patch exists that does oid only filenames.
>
> Andreas
>
>

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Mikheev, Vadim 2000-09-14 17:17:56 RE: strange behaviour (bug)
Previous Message Thomas Lockhart 2000-09-14 16:59:01 Touched-up regression tests