| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Euler Taveira" <euler(at)eulerto(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Fujii Masao" <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>, katsuaki(dot)fukushima(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com |
| Subject: | Re: BUG #16854: initdb fails on ReFS and FAT32 file systems |
| Date: | 2021-02-05 17:01:51 |
| Message-ID: | 111019.1612544511@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
"Euler Taveira" <euler(at)eulerto(dot)com> writes:
> On Fri, Feb 5, 2021, at 12:26 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> ReFS is Microsoft's latest and greatest attempt at implementing a modern
>> file system. I'd quantify the greatness pretty poorly if they left out
>> hard links (I wonder what other essentials they didn't bother with)
>> but maybe we have to support it.
> It claims that the latest ReFS version (3.5) supports hard links [1].
Hmm, what [1] actually says about that is
Version ReFS 3.5 formatted by Windows 10 Enterprise Insider Preview
build 19536. Added hardlink support if fresh formatted volume. Can't
use hardlink if upgraded from previous version
so it's not exactly mainstream yet.
But given that, I'm content to say "you can use ReFS if you have
a version that supports hard links". We don't need to support
work-in-progress filesystems.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2021-02-06 01:18:31 | Re: BUG #16854: initdb fails on ReFS and FAT32 file systems |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2021-02-05 16:56:38 | Re: BUG #16855: No partition pruning when using partitions with custom hash function |