Re: pg_tablespace_location() failure with allow_in_place_tablespaces

From: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
Cc: Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pg_tablespace_location() failure with allow_in_place_tablespaces
Date: 2022-03-15 10:16:52
Message-ID: CA+hUKGKq1A0WB9nFMUUOJyk2TgTUnq0r8Ybk9NiAjfbTpeVc_w@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 10:30 PM Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
> So, which one of a relative path or an absolute path do you think
> would be better for the user? My preference tends toward the relative
> path, as we know that all those tablespaces stay in pg_tblspc/ so one
> can make the difference with normal tablespaces more easily. The
> barrier is thin, though :p

Sounds good to me.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Kapila 2022-03-15 10:18:08 Re: Skipping logical replication transactions on subscriber side
Previous Message Dilip Kumar 2022-03-15 09:53:59 Re: [Proposal] Fully WAL logged CREATE DATABASE - No Checkpoints