> In addition,rename(),unlink(),mv aren't preferable for transaction
> control as far as I see. We couldn't avoid inconsistency using
> those OS functions.
> We have to wait the change of relation file naming if copying
> vacuum is needed.
> Under the spec we need not rename(),mv etc.
Are you worried the system may crash in the middle of renaming one
table, but not the indexes. That would be a serious problem.
I see now. I can't think of a way around that. The rename() itself is
atomic.
-- 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
