Re: Reviewing temp_tablespaces GUC patch
От | Jaime Casanova |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Reviewing temp_tablespaces GUC patch |
Дата | |
Msg-id | c2d9e70e0705261634t7cc66e48m99dc45688abb496@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Reviewing temp_tablespaces GUC patch (Bernd Helmle <mailings@oopsware.de>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 5/25/07, Bernd Helmle <mailings@oopsware.de> wrote: > --On Freitag, Mai 25, 2007 00:02:06 +0000 Jaime Casanova > <systemguards@gmail.com> wrote: > > sounds good. can we see the new patch? > > Attached tablespace.c.diff shows my current changes to use an OID lookup > list. > on second thought, what happens if someone drops an empty tablespace, that already is in the temp_tablespace GUC, and recreate it (one scenario for this is if you want to move the tablespace to a newer better/faster location). then will have an invalid oid until at least you execute a new SET temp_tablespaces. And we know some "DBA's" doesn't read the manual, so maybe this behaviour will be unexpected for them... > > > > the reason for those messages is that the tablespace can get full or > > can be dropped before use, so we throw the message for the dba to take > > actions. if no one thinks is a good idea the message can be removed. > > > > I could imagine that this could irritate DBA's (at least, that is what > happened to me during testing). Well at least with this message they will be alerted, but still seems silly to me... (make a SET with the same list just for updating cached OID's) -- regards, Jaime Casanova "Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build bigger and better idiot-proof programs and the universe trying to produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the universe is winning." Richard Cook
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: