> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > OTOH I don't think it's a good thing to try creating
> > > these things on the fly the first time needed. The
> > > required catalog changes and file creations introduce all
> > > kinds of possible rollback/crash problems, that we don't
> > > want to have here - do we?
> >
> > Well, we could print the message suggesing ALTER TABLE when printing
> > tuple too large. Frankly, I don't see a problem in creating the backup
> > table automatically. If you are worried about performance, how about
> > putting it in a subdirectory.
>
> It's the toast-table and the index. So it's 2 Inodes and 16K
> per table. If the backend is compiled with -g, someone needs
> to create about 500 tables to waste the same amount of space.
>
> Well, I like the subdirectory idea. I only wonder how that
> should be implemented (actually the tablename is the filename
> - and that doesn't allow / in it).
Not sure. It will take some tricks, I am sure. How about if we add
some TOAST option to CREATE TABLE, so they can create with TOAST support
rather than having to use ALTER every time. Maybe that would work.
-- 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
