| From: | "Merlin Moncure" <merlin(dot)moncure(at)rcsonline(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | <tswan(at)idigx(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "PostgreSQL Win32 port list" <pgsql-hackers-win32(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Tablespaces |
| Date: | 2004-03-04 20:24:21 |
| Message-ID: | 6EE64EF3AB31D5448D0007DD34EEB34101AD79@Herge.rcsinc.local |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers-win32 |
> I'm ruferring to NTFS and the win32 platforms. How does tar handle
these
> symlinks on the NTFS filesystem? What about if someone finds that
FAT32
> is significantly better for the database?
FAT32 is not a journaling filesystem and has no security features and is
not suitable for databases, period. Microsoft NT setup disks do not
even allow FAT32 to be installed on disks over a certain size for the
boot partition.
PostgreSQL relies on standard features of the POSIX system, not on O/S
attributes. AFAIK, win32 is the only non POSIX API supported by the
PosgreSQL developers. If Microsoft's non POSIX compliance bothers you,
install Interix, which provides POSIX for win32 (including symlinks).
Or, use the linking option provided by the good folks who are doing the
native port.
Merlin
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2004-03-04 20:29:26 | Re: [HACKERS] Tablespaces |
| Previous Message | tswan | 2004-03-04 20:06:43 | Re: [HACKERS] Tablespaces |