Re: [HACKERS] [hackers]development suggestion needed

> As you say, you can fake it manually with symbolic links, but that's
> a kluge.
>
> The "database location" stuff that Peter and Thomas have been arguing
> about is intended to allow a single postmaster to control databases that
> are in multiple physical locations --- but there seems to be some debate
> as to whether it works ;-). (I never tried it.) In any case, we don't
> currently have any official provision for controlling location at finer
> than database level. It'd be nice to be able to push individual tables
> around, I suppose.
>
> This wouldn't require a new storage manager, since presumably you'd
> still be using the Unix-filesystem storage manager. The trick would be
> to allow a path rather than just a base file name to be specified
> per-relation. I'm not sure if it'd be hard or not. Probably, all the
> system tables would have to stay in the database's default directory,
> but maybe user tables could be given path names without too much
> trouble...

Or we could continue to use symlinks, and just create them ourselves in
the backend.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026