Re: Big 7.1 open items
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Big 7.1 open items |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 8244.961182010@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Big 7.1 open items (Don Baccus <dhogaza@pacifier.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Big 7.1 open items
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Don Baccus <dhogaza@pacifier.com> writes: >> This isn't any harder for md.c to deal with than what we do now, >> but by making the /N subdirectories be symlinks, the dbadmin could >> easily arrange for extension segments to go on different filesystems. > I personally dislike depending on symlinks to move stuff around. > Among other things, a pg_dump/restore (and presumably future > backup tools?) can't recreate the disk layout automatically. Good point, we'd need some way of saving/restoring the tablespace structures. >> We'd still want to create some tools to help the dbadmin with slinging >> all these symlinks around, of course. > OK, if symlinks are simply an implementation detail hidden from the > dbadmin, and if the physical structure is kept in the db so it can > be rebuilt if necessary automatically, then I don't mind symlinks. I'm not sure about keeping it in the db --- creates a bit of a chicken-and-egg problem doesn't it? Maybe there needs to be a "system database" that has nailed-down pathnames (no tablespaces for you baby) and contains the critical installation-wide tables like pg_database, pg_user, pg_tablespace. A restore would have to restore these tables first anyway. > Make the code that creates and otherwise manipulates tablespaces > do the work, while keeping the low-level file access protocol simple. Right, that's the bottom line for me. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: