> At 09:40 20/06/00 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >
> > [lots of stuff about symlinks]
> >
>
> It just occurred to me that the symlinks concerns may be short-circuitable,
> if the following are true:
>
> 1. most of the desirability is for external 'management' and debugging etc
> on 'reasonably' static database designs.
>
> 2. metadata changes (specifically renaming tables) occur infrequently.
>
> 3. there is no reason why they are desirable *technically* within the
> implementations being discussed.
>
> 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 outdated, from an integrity point of view, and for the most part they can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.
>
> Have I missed something?
I am a little confused. Are you suggesting that the entire symlink
thing can be done outside the database? Yes, that is true if we don't
store the symlink locations in the database. Of course, the database
has to be down to do this.
-- 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