| From: | "scott(dot)marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)fourpalms(dot)org> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers List <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: WAL file location |
| Date: | 2002-08-02 19:07:14 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.44.0208021305530.28034-100000@css120.ihs.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, 2 Aug 2002, Thomas Lockhart wrote:
> > > I am wondering why we even want to specify the WAL location anywhere
> > > except as a flag to initdb. If you specify a location at initdb time,
> > > it creates the /xlog directory, then symlinks it into /data.
> > Does this have any negative implications for Win32 ports?
>
> Sure. the symlinks thing was just a suggestion. Everything else is
> portable for sure... Or is there some other area you are concerned
> about?
NTFS does support symlinks. It's just not very well known, but the gnu
utilities for windows can let you create soft links.
Scott Marlowe
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2002-08-02 19:16:32 | Re: FUNC_MAX_ARGS benchmarks |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2002-08-02 19:05:10 | Re: PITR, checkpoint, and local relations |