Tom Lane writes:
> I think Peter was holding out for storing purely numeric tablespace OID
> and table version in pg_class and having a hardwired mapping to pathname
> somewhere in smgr. However, I think that doing it that way gains only
> micro-efficiency compared to passing a "name" around, while using the
> name approach buys us flexibility that's needed for at least some of
> the variants under discussion.
But that name can only be a dozen or so characters, contain no slash or
other funny characters, etc. That's really poor. Then the alternative is
to have an internal name and an external canonical name. Then you have two
names to worry about. Also consider that when you store both the table
space oid and the internal name in pg_class you create redundant data.
What if you rename the table space? Do you leave the internal name out of
sync? Then what good is the internal name? I'm just concerned that we are
creating at the table space level problems similar to that we're trying to
get rid of at the relation and database level.
--
Peter Eisentraut Sernanders väg 10:115
peter_e@gmx.net 75262 Uppsala
http://yi.org/peter-e/ Sweden