Re: CREATE DATABASE with filesystem cloning
| От | Ranier Vilela |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: CREATE DATABASE with filesystem cloning |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAEudQAp6vCBqzeRPazEYQoh3mTQQke-1cgm2PD+DytLdOz0iNg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: CREATE DATABASE with filesystem cloning (Nazir Bilal Yavuz <byavuz81@gmail.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: CREATE DATABASE with filesystem cloning
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Em ter., 21 de mai. de 2024 às 05:18, Nazir Bilal Yavuz <byavuz81@gmail.com> escreveu:
Hi,
On Thu, 16 May 2024 at 17:47, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, May 16, 2024 at 9:43 AM Nazir Bilal Yavuz <byavuz81@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Actually, the documentation for the file_copy_method was mentioning
> > the things it controls; I converted it to an itemized list now. Also,
> > changed the comment to: 'Further uses of this function requires
> > updates to the list that GUC controls in its documentation.'. v7 is
> > attached.
>
> I think the comments need some wordsmithing.
I changed it to 'Uses of this function must be documented in the list
of places affected by this GUC.', I am open to any suggestions.
> I don't see why this parameter should be PGC_POSTMASTER.
I changed it to 'PGC_USERSET' now. My initial point was the database
or tablespace to be copied with the same method. I thought copying
some portion of the database with the copy and rest with the clone
could cause potential problems. After a bit of searching, I could not
find any problems related to that.
v8 is attached.
Hi,
I did some research on the subject and despite being an improvement,
I believe that some terminologies should be changed in this patch.
Although the new function is called *clone_file*, I'm not sure if it really is "clone".
Why MacOS added an API called clonefile [1] and Linux exists
another called FICLONE.[2]
So perhaps it should be treated here as a copy and not a clone?
Leaving it open, is the possibility of implementing a true clone api?
Thoughts?
Although the new function is called *clone_file*, I'm not sure if it really is "clone".
Why MacOS added an API called clonefile [1] and Linux exists
another called FICLONE.[2]
So perhaps it should be treated here as a copy and not a clone?
Leaving it open, is the possibility of implementing a true clone api?
Thoughts?
best regards,
Ranier Vilela
[1] clonefile
--
Regards,
Nazir Bilal Yavuz
Microsoft
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: