Josh Berkus wrote:<br /><blockquote cite="mid200206261112.02982.josh@agliodbs.com" type="cite"><pre
wrap="">Eric,</pre><blockquotetype="cite"><pre wrap="">I like the idea of putting it on a hard disk or partition of
fixedsize and
waiting for the DB to simply crash.
hahaha </pre></blockquote><pre wrap="">Yeah. <grin> It's what MS SQL Server does, though. As I said, I
thinkthe
whole concept of limiting database size in MB is fundamentally flawed. I
mean, what's the database supposed to do when it runs out of space?</pre></blockquote> Refuse updates, deletes, and
inserts(from anything other than a DB superuser). However you should be able to select data. Once the database has
exceededits bounds, it would revert to read only status and wait for administrative intervention such as enlarging the
quota(allocatable size) or altering the database to reduce its size.<br /><br /> Adding the checks wouldn't break
existingdatabases if you defaulted the checks to off.<br /><br /> This could also significantly help in hosting
situationsby preventing a client for exceeding a specified quota and taking over the allocated area for the postgres
database.<br/><br /> Thinking about it, it seems like a good safety feature (aside from good partitioning and system
layoutto begin with).<br /><br /><br /><br /><br />
