| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | jearl(at)bullysports(dot)com |
| Cc: | "Thomas Swan" <tswan(at)idigx(dot)com>, "Bruce Momjian" <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD" <zeugswettera(at)spardat(dot)at>, "Greg Stark" <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, "PostgreSQL Win32 port list" <pgsql-hackers-win32(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Tablespaces |
| Date: | 2004-03-06 06:13:58 |
| Message-ID: | 14449.1078553638@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-hackers-win32 |
[ lots of opinions about depending on symlinks for tablespaces ]
One thing that I think hasn't been noted in this thread is that our
initial implementation won't bind us forever. If it becomes clear that
a symlink-based implementation has real problems, we can change it.
But if we spend extra effort to avoid symlinks from the start, we will
never know whether that effort was justified or wasted.
We have enough work to do to make tablespaces happen that I feel we
should take the path of least resistance to start with. I do not think
it would cost us much wasted effort if the decision proves out wrong.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | John Siracusa | 2004-03-07 02:29:27 | Re: Feature request: smarter use of conditional indexes |
| Previous Message | David Garamond | 2004-03-06 05:26:03 | Re: Sigh, 7.3.6 rewrap not right |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Magnus Hagander | 2004-03-07 13:22:21 | Re: APC + socket restrictions under Win32? |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2004-03-05 23:56:33 | Re: [HACKERS] Another crack at doing a Win32 |