Обсуждение: Re: [HACKERS] [hackers]development suggestion needed (filepath as symlink)
Re: [HACKERS] [hackers]development suggestion needed (filepath as symlink)
От
Zeugswetter Andreas SB
Дата:
> Yes, that's about the sum of it. Why not the links? I think > that it's an elegant way of designing the whole thing. The only problem with symlinks is, that it does not solve the "too many files in one directory to give optimal performance" problem for those that have tons of tables. Andreas
> > Yes, that's about the sum of it. Why not the links? I think > > that it's an elegant way of designing the whole thing. > > The only problem with symlinks is, that it does not solve the > "too many files in one directory to give optimal performance" > problem for those that have tons of tables. > > Andreas Is that really a problem on modern operating systems? We could actually hash the file names into directory buckets and access them that way, and have one directory that old symlinks to the hashed files. -- 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
Re: [HACKERS] [hackers]development suggestion needed (filepath as symlink)
От
The Hermit Hacker
Дата:
On Tue, 18 Jan 2000, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > Yes, that's about the sum of it. Why not the links? I think > > > that it's an elegant way of designing the whole thing. > > > > The only problem with symlinks is, that it does not solve the > > "too many files in one directory to give optimal performance" > > problem for those that have tons of tables. > > > > Andreas > > Is that really a problem on modern operating systems? We could actually > hash the file names into directory buckets and access them that way, and > have one directory that old symlinks to the hashed files. Personally, except in *exceptional* circumstances, I hate symlinks...that was one of my first projects whenI started working at th eocal University, was to get rid of the garbage "revision control" system they had for packages installed on the system ... IMHO, there have been several methods of doing this, some easier then others, wihtout having to use symlinks for them ... can we *please* avoid using them? Marc G. Fournier ICQ#7615664 IRC Nick: Scrappy Systems Administrator @ hub.org primary: scrappy@hub.org secondary: scrappy@{freebsd|postgresql}.org
> > > Yes, that's about the sum of it. Why not the links? I think > > > that it's an elegant way of designing the whole thing. > > The only problem with symlinks is, that it does not solve the > > "too many files in one directory to give optimal performance" > > problem for those that have tons of tables. > Is that really a problem on modern operating systems? We could actually > hash the file names into directory buckets and access them that way, and > have one directory that old symlinks to the hashed files. imho symlinks is exactly the wrong way to head on this. If the system needs to know the true location of something, then it may as well refer to that location explicitly. Our storage manager should learn how to deal with explicit locations, and we shouldn't implement this just as a patch on the table creation code. My $.02... - Thomas -- Thomas Lockhart lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu South Pasadena, California
> > > > Yes, that's about the sum of it. Why not the links? I think > > > > that it's an elegant way of designing the whole thing. > > > The only problem with symlinks is, that it does not solve the > > > "too many files in one directory to give optimal performance" > > > problem for those that have tons of tables. > > Is that really a problem on modern operating systems? We could actually > > hash the file names into directory buckets and access them that way, and > > have one directory that old symlinks to the hashed files. > > imho symlinks is exactly the wrong way to head on this. If the system > needs to know the true location of something, then it may as well > refer to that location explicitly. Our storage manager should learn > how to deal with explicit locations, and we shouldn't implement this > just as a patch on the table creation code. > OK, no symlinks. -- 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
At 02:26 AM 1/19/00 +0000, Thomas Lockhart wrote: >imho symlinks is exactly the wrong way to head on this. If the system >needs to know the true location of something, then it may as well >refer to that location explicitly. Our storage manager should learn >how to deal with explicit locations, and we shouldn't implement this >just as a patch on the table creation code. That's my feeling too. We could document the query needed to list where all tables are located, grouped by tablespace. - Don Baccus, Portland OR <dhogaza@pacifier.com> Nature photos, on-line guides, Pacific Northwest Rare Bird Alert Serviceand other goodies at http://donb.photo.net.