Re: Big 7.1 open items - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: Big 7.1 open items
Date
Msg-id 200006191735.NAA03241@candle.pha.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to RE: Big 7.1 open items  ("Hiroshi Inoue" <Inoue@tpf.co.jp>)
Responses RE: Big 7.1 open items  ("Hiroshi Inoue" <Inoue@tpf.co.jp>)
List pgsql-hackers
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Bruce Momjian [mailto:pgman@candle.pha.pa.us]
> > 
> > The fact is that symlink information is already stored in the file
> > system.  If we store symlink information in the database too, there
> > exists the ability for the two to get out of sync.  My point is that I
> > think we can _not_ store symlink information in the database, and query
> > the file system using lstat when required.
> >
> 
> Hmm,this seems pretty confusing to me.
> I don't understand the necessity of symlink.
> Directory tree,symlink,hard link ... are OS's standard.
> But I don't think they are fit for dbms management.
> 
> PostgreSQL is a database system of cource. So
> couldn't it handle more flexible structure than OS's
> directory tree for itself ?

Yes, but is anyone suggesting a solution that does not work with
symlinks?  If not, why not do it that way?

--  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
 


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Jon Lapham
Date:
Subject: CREATE GROUP oddity
Next
From: Paul Condon
Date:
Subject: Re: int24_ops and int42_ops are bogus