Re: pg_basebackup vs. Windows and tablespaces

Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 16, 2014 at 6:15 AM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
> wrote:

> > I think the fact that we use symlinks is an implementation detail;
> > aren't them actually junction points, not symlinks, in some Windows
> > cases?
>
> Right, but they provide same functionality as symlinks and now we
> are even planing to provide this feature for both linux and windows as
> both Tom and Robert seems to feel, it's better that way. Anyhow,
> I think naming any entity generally differs based on individual's
> perspective, so we can go with the name which appeals to more people.
> In case, nobody else has any preference, I will change it to what both
> of us can agree upon (either 'tablespace catalog', 'tablespace_info' ...).

Well, I have made my argument. Since you're the submitter, feel free to
select what you think is the best name.

> > > > One use case mentioned upthread is having the clone be created in the
> > > > same machine as the source server. Does your proposal help with it?

> That use case got addressed with -T option with which user can relocate
> tablespace directory (Commit: fb05f3c; pg_basebackup: Add support for
> relocating tablespaces)

Okay. As far as I know, -T only works for plain mode, right? I wonder
if we should make -T modify the tablespace catalog, so that the
resulting file in tar output outputs names mangled per the map; that
would make -T work in tar mode too. Does that make sense? (Maybe it
already works that way? I didn't research.)

--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services