Re: Index location patch for review

From: "Jim Buttafuoco" <jim(at)buttafuoco(dot)net>
To: "Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev(at)SECTORBASE(dot)COM>, "'Bruce Momjian'" <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, jim(at)buttafuoco(dot)net, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Index location patch for review
Date: 2001-09-12 18:22:02
Message-ID: 200109121822.f8CIM2D09850@dual.buttafuoco.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

I agree that groups of objects in separate data storage areas are needed
and that is what I am trying to get to. Don't you think that Postgresql
with locations/files is the same as Oracle tablespaces. I don't think
we want to invent our own filesystem (which is what a tablespace really
is...).

Jim

> > > Attached is a patch that adds support for specifying a
> > > location for indexes via the "create database" command.
> > >
> > > I believe this patch is complete, but it is my first .
> >
> > This patch allows index locations to be specified as
> > different from data locations. Is this a feature direction
> > we want to go in? Comments?
>
> The more general and "standard" way to go are TABLESPACEs.
> But probably proposed feature will be compatible with
> tablespaces, when we'll got them: we could use new "create
> database" syntax to specify default tablespace for indices.
> Unfortunately I removed message with patch, can you send it
> to me, Bruce?
>
> Vadim
>
>

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2001-09-12 18:22:05 Re: Index location patch for review
Previous Message Tom Lane 2001-09-12 17:54:02 Re: Index location patch for review