>I agree with Tatsuo though I prefer
> create table t1 (i int) tablespace foo;
>.
>Isn't it preferable to encapsulate the table location and storage type ?
Agreed.
>At first,a tablespace would only correspond to a directory and it won't
>be so difficult to implment. But we would gain a lot with the feature.
>
>In the future,the tablespace may be changed to mean real(??)
>tablespace.
Good point.
> I think the major problem that I'm worried about isn't spreading tables
> across drives, but its when that *one* table grows to the point that its
> about to overflow my drive...I'd rather add a 9gig drive on, make it an
> 18gig file system, and let it continue to grow...
We could extend the create tablespace command something like:
create tablespace foo as '/pg/myspace1 /pg/myspace2 ';
to spread a table (space) among different disk drives. Moreover we
could define the "policy" to use the tablespace:
create tablespace foo as '/pg/myspace1 /pg/myspace2 ' policy roundrobin;
in above case, if the table hits the 1GB limit in /pg/myspace1 then
new segment will be created in /pg/myspace2.
Just an idea...
--
Tatsuo Ishii