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

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Big 7.1 open items
Date
Msg-id 29798.961512338@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Big 7.1 open items  ("Philip J. Warner" <pjw@rhyme.com.au>)
Responses Re: Big 7.1 open items
List pgsql-hackers
"Philip J. Warner" <pjw@rhyme.com.au> writes:
> If these are true, then why not create a utility (eg. pg_update_symlinks)
> that creates the relevant symlinks. It does not matter if they are
> outdated, from an integrity point of view, and for the most part they can
> be automatically maintained. Internally, postgresql can totally ignore them.

What?

I think you are confusing a couple of different things.  IIRC, at one
time when we were just thinking about ALTER TABLE RENAME, there was
a suggestion that the "real" table files be named by table OID, and
that there be symlinks to those files named by logical table name as
a crutch (:-)) for admins who wanted to know which table file was which.
That could be handled as you've sketched above, but I think the whole
proposal has fallen by the wayside anyway.

The current discussion of symlinks is focusing on using directory
symlinks, not file symlinks, to represent/implement tablespace layout.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Big 7.1 open items
Next
From: "Philip J. Warner"
Date:
Subject: Re: Big 7.1 open items