From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: config files in /data |
Date: | 2000-05-31 23:15:33 |
Message-ID: | 12031.959814933@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
>> Right. How about `$PGDATA/internal'? Can't be more obvious. Perhaps with
>> that we could also have initdb clean up a little more respectfully.
> Are we talking about moveing pg_log and pg_shadow? Maybe call it
> /global because the tables are global to all databases.
We weren't, but it seems like a good idea now that you mention it.
So it sounds like we are converging on:
$PGDATA itself contains only directly-editable config files
$PGDATA/base/ contains database subdirectories (same as now)
$PGDATA/global/ contains installation-wide tables (pg_database,
pg_shadow, their indices, etc)
$PGDATA/internal/ contains anything else that is installation-wide
but is not a table.
The distinction between /global and /internal is a little bit artificial
(which one does pg_log belong in? It's only sort of a table...), so
maybe we'd be better off just putting those two together. Don't have
a strong opinion either way.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2000-05-31 23:21:00 | Re: config files in /data |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2000-05-31 23:08:57 | Re: Database names with spaces |