Re: [GENERAL] Physical Database Configuration

Tom Lane wrote:
> nolan(at)celery(dot)tssi(dot)com writes:
> > I disagree. Just as you can have multiple schemas within one database
> > you can have multiple tablespaces within one database.
>
> > And the tablespace is irrelevant as far as specifying an object is concerned.
> > A fully qualified object would be:
> > database.schema.object,
> > not tablespace.database.schema.object or database.tablespace.schema.object.
>
> Right, the tablespace structure is really orthogonal to the
> database/schema structure.
>
> I would envision tablespaces as being named by database-cluster-wide
> names, just as users and groups are. Any given table could be placed
> in any tablespace (although perhaps we want to invent some permission
> mechanism here).
>
> Physically a tablespace is a directory with sub-directories for
> databases under it --- so $PGDATA/base plays the role of the default
> tablespace for a cluster. (The reason you need per-database
> sub-directories is mostly to support DROP DATABASE, which has to be
> able to nuke a database without knowing exactly what's in it.) But
> this structure doesn't have anything to do with the logical structure
> of the database cluster.

Another good reason for per-database directories under the tablespace is
to prevent directories from containing too many files.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073