Re: Thanks, naming conventions, and count()
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Thanks, naming conventions, and count() |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 10996.988610881@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Thanks, naming conventions, and count() (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Thanks, naming conventions, and count()
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes: > big problem is that there is no good way to make the symlinks reliable > because in a crash, the symlink could point to a table creation that got > rolled back or the renaming of a table that got rolled back. Yes. Have you already forgotten the very long discussion we had about this some months back? There is no way to provide a reliable symlink mapping without re-introducing all the same problems that we went to numeric filenames to avoid. Now if you want an *UNRELIABLE* symlink mapping, maybe we could talk about it ... but IMHO such a feature would be worse than useless. Murphy's law says that the symlinks would be right often enough to mislead dbadmins into trusting them, and wrong exactly when it would do the most damage to trust them. The same goes for other methods of unreliably exporting the name-to-number mapping, such as dumping it into a flat file. We do need to document how to get the mapping (ie, select relfilenode, relname from pg_class). But I really doubt that an automated method for exporting the mapping would be worth the cycles it would cost, even if it could be made reliable which it can't. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: