Re: Big 7.1 open items

> At 08:08 PM 6/18/00 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> 
> >> Does your proposal break the smgr abstraction, i.e. does it
> >> preclude later efforts to (say) implement an (optional) 
> >> raw-device storage manager?
> >
> >Seeing very few want that done, I don't see it as an issue at this
> >point.
> 
> Sorry, I disagree.  There's excuse for breaking existing abstractions
> unless there's a compelling reason to do so.
> 
> My question should make it clear I was using a raw-device storage
> manager as an example.  There are other possbilities, like a 
> many-tables-per-file storage manager.

I agree it is nice to keep things as abstract as possible.  I just don't
know if the abstraction will cause added complexity.

--  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://www.op.net/~candle pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610)
853-3000+  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill,
Pennsylvania19026