| From: | "scott(dot)marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Gavin Sherry <swm(at)linuxworld(dot)com(dot)au>, "Alex J(dot) Avriette" <alex(at)posixnap(dot)net>, Dennis Bjorklund <db(at)zigo(dot)dhs(dot)org>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Tablespaces |
| Date: | 2004-02-27 17:56:32 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.33.0402271054530.14753-100000@css120.ihs.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-hackers-win32 |
On Fri, 27 Feb 2004, Tom Lane wrote:
> "scott.marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com> writes:
> > Is possible / reasonable / smart and or dumb to look at implementing the
> > tablespaces as riding atop the initlocation handled stuff.
>
> In my mind, one of the main benefits of this work will be that we'll be
> able to get *rid* of the initlocation stuff. It's a crock.
OK, that's fine, but I keep thinking that a superuser should have to
create the tablespace itself, and then tables can be assigned by users
based on the rights assigned by the dba / superuser. Is that how we're
looking at doing it, or will any user be able to create a tablespace
anywhere postgresql has write permission, or will only dbas be able to
create AND use table spaces. I'm just not sure how that's gonna be
handled, and haven't seen it addressed.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | janos | 2004-02-27 18:19:15 | Re: Collaboration Tool Proposal |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2004-02-27 17:42:15 | Re: Tablespaces |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | janos | 2004-02-27 18:19:15 | Re: Collaboration Tool Proposal |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2004-02-27 17:42:15 | Re: Tablespaces |