| From: | "Marko Kreen" <markokr(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Gregory Stark" <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Heikki Linnakangas" <heikki(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: pgsql: Add relation fork support to pg_relation_size() function. |
| Date: | 2008-10-03 11:27:50 |
| Message-ID: | e51f66da0810030427k1adbff79g4ebe1feaa3c1f76e@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
On 10/3/08, Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> Hm, I wonder if we should have made the forks use a fork "name" instead of a
> number. It sure would be nicer to have files name 12345.fsm instead of another
> opaque number.
>
> The other reason I thought of this is that if EDB or anyone else uses forks
> for a private purpose then it would avoid the whole issue of conflicts. The
> best option right now would be to set aside a range of values for private
> purposes.
Good idea.
--
marko
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2008-10-03 12:37:07 | Re: pgsql: Add relation fork support to pg_relation_size() function. |
| Previous Message | Gregory Stark | 2008-10-03 09:31:07 | Re: pgsql: Add relation fork support to pg_relation_size() function. |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2008-10-03 12:28:15 | Re: numeric_big test |
| Previous Message | Gregory Stark | 2008-10-03 09:31:07 | Re: pgsql: Add relation fork support to pg_relation_size() function. |