Re: Big 7.1 open items
От | Peter Eisentraut |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Big 7.1 open items |
Дата | |
Msg-id | Pine.LNX.4.21.0007011653280.13037-100000@localhost.localdomain обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Big 7.1 open items (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Big 7.1 open items
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane writes: > In practice, for someone who doesn't need to worry about tablespaces > (because they put the installation on a disk with enough room for > their purposes), the whole thing acts exactly the same as it does now. But I'd venture the guess that for someone who wants to use tablespaces it wouldn't work as expected. Table spaces should represent a physical storage location. Creation of table spaces should be a restricted operation, possibly more than, but at least differently from, databases. Eventually, table spaces probably will have attributes, such as optimization parameters (random_page_cost). This will not work as expected if you intermix them with the databases. I'd expect that if I have three disks and 50 databases, then I make three tablespaces and assign the databases to them. I'll bet lunch that if we don't do it that way that before long people will come along and ask for something that does work this way. -- Peter Eisentraut Sernanders väg 10:115 peter_e@gmx.net 75262 Uppsala http://yi.org/peter-e/ Sweden
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: