From: | Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Tablespaces |
Date: | 2004-02-27 05:26:06 |
Message-ID: | 87ad35gkk1.fsf@stark.xeocode.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | Postg토토 핫SQL : pgsql-hackers-win32 |
> > I am expecting to hear some bleating about this from people whose
> > preferred platforms don't support symlinks ;-). However, if we don't
Well, one option would be to have the low level filesystem storage (md.c?)
routines implement a kind of symlink themselves. Just a file with a special
magic number followed by a path.
I'm normally against reimplementing OS services but symlinks are really a very
simple concept and simple to implement. Especially if you can make a few
simplifying assumptions: they only ever need to appear as the final path
element not as parent directories and tablespaces don't need symlinks pointing
to symlinks. Ideally postgres also doesn't need to implement relative links
either.
--
greg
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2004-02-27 06:10:21 | Re: [HACKERS] Collaboration Tool Proposal |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2004-02-27 05:25:31 | Re: [HACKERS] Collaboration Tool Proposal |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2004-02-27 06:10:21 | Re: [HACKERS] Collaboration Tool Proposal |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2004-02-27 05:25:31 | Re: [HACKERS] Collaboration Tool Proposal |