From: | Jonathan Bartlett <johnnyb(at)eskimo(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | nolan(at)celery(dot)tssi(dot)com |
Cc: | shridhar_daithankar(at)persistent(dot)co(dot)in, <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Physical Database Configuration |
Date: | 2003-06-25 15:51:30 |
Message-ID: | Pine.GSU.4.44.0306250846330.13415-100000@eskimo.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
My solution did not involve tablespaces, but was more of a quick solution
to make it easier for admins to do _some_ sort of physical configuration.
The idea is that the developer could do something like
'create alternate location ALTERNATE_LOCATION_NAME for
DATABASE_OBJECT_NAME at "/PATH/TO/PHYSICAL/FILE";'
We would have a system table holding theses values. Then, all database
commands which create a file for an object, call open_object(oid,
object_name) or something to create the file object. This will first look
in the new system table to see if there is a mapping for an object of this
name. If so, it will create a symlink to "/PATH/TO/PHYSICAL/FILE" for the
oid before opening the file.
Anyway, if people are working on tablespaces, I'll defer to them. This
small fix is something that I might actually have time to do, but
tablespaces definitely not.
Jon
On Wed, 25 Jun 2003 nolan(at)celery(dot)tssi(dot)com wrote:
> > Well, correct solution is to implement tablespaces on which objects like
> > databases, tables and indexes can be put.
>
> I've not looked at the SQL standard, but it seems to me like the order
> should be:
>
> Databases
> Tablespaces
> Schemas
> Objects (tables, indexes, functions, etc.)
>
> And it really isn't hierarchical. As I understand them (based on my
> Oracle background), tablespaces, unlike schemas, do NOT create a layer
> of data abstraction. That is to say, while the same table name
> can exist in multiple schemas, only one instance of a given table name
> within a given schema can exist, regardless of what tablespace it is in.
>
> That makes the tablespace a property of an object.
>
> Whether or not two databases can share tablespaces isn't clear to me,
> though as a DBA I can think of good reasons why they probably shouldn't
> do so, I'm not sure if that is an absolute.
>
> > I have no idea what is the status of that effort right now. You can search the
> > archives or I hope this kicks a fresh discussion..:-)
>
> I'm game, though I'm also not ready to lead such a project, probably not
> even the discussion on it.
> --
> Mike Nolan
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Paul Thomas | 2003-06-25 15:53:53 | Re: |
Previous Message | Johnson, Shaunn | 2003-06-25 15:44:29 | how to fix missing chunk number 0? |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Rod Taylor | 2003-06-25 15:51:47 | ECPG compile error |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2003-06-25 15:42:29 | Re: RServ patch to support multiple slaves (sorta) |