Re: Big 7.1 open items

At 09:40 20/06/00 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> [lots of stuff about symlinks]
>

It just occurred to me that the symlinks concerns may be short-circuitable,
if the following are true:

1. most of the desirability is for external 'management' and debugging etc
on 'reasonably' static database designs.

2. metadata changes (specifically renaming tables) occur infrequently.

3. there is no reason why they are desirable *technically* within the
implementations being discussed.

If these are true, then why not create a utility (eg. pg_update_symlinks)
that creates the relevant symlinks. It does not matter if they are
outdated, from an integrity point of view, and for the most part they can
be automatically maintained. Internally, postgresql can totally ignore them.

Have I missed something?

----------------------------------------------------------------
Philip Warner | __---_____
Albatross Consulting Pty. Ltd. |----/ - \
(A.C.N. 008 659 498) | /(@) ______---_
Tel: (+61) 0500 83 82 81 | _________ \
Fax: (+61) 0500 83 82 82 | ___________ |
Http://www.rhyme.com.au | / \|
| --________--
PGP key available upon request, | /
and from pgp5.ai.mit.edu:11371 |/