| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(dot)dunstan(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: partitioned indexes and tablespaces |
| Date: | 2018-11-03 19:32:03 |
| Message-ID: | 23202.1541273523@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> On 2018-Nov-03, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>> +1. This is unquestionably a POLA violation that should be fixed, IMNSHO.
> Yeah, that's my view on it too.
> Pushed.
Hmm ... in the April thread, one of the main concerns that prevented hasty
action was fear of breaking dump/restore behavior. Have you checked that
with this change, a dump/restore will restore the same state (same
actual tablespace assignments) that existed in the source DB? How about
if the parent partitioned index's tablespace assignment has been changed
since a child index was made? What happens with the --no-tablespaces
option?
I think I'm okay with this change if the answers to all those questions
are sane, but I didn't see them discussed in this thread.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2018-11-03 19:35:20 | Re: plruby: rb_iterate symbol clash with libruby.so |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2018-11-03 19:30:15 | Re: partitioned indexes and tablespaces |