From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Andreas Joseph Krogh <andreas(at)visena(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Move pg_largeobject to a different tablespace *without* turning on system_table_mods. |
Date: | 2016-10-19 16:29:31 |
Message-ID: | 20161019162931.GL5087@momjian.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 04:51:54PM +0200, Andreas Joseph Krogh wrote:
> > 2. Being able to move pg_largeobject to a different tablespace
> > *without* turning on system_table_mods. This is important for
> > people storing LOTS of large-objects on separate
> > disks (non-SSD) and hence in a different tablespace.
> > Anyone willing to discuss this?
> >
> This was proposed a few years ago but no one cared to draft a patch.
>
>
> So that why I'm re-raising the issue:-)
> Having "everything in the database" adds lots of benefits, conceptually
> (follows tx-semantics, consistent backups etc.), however it's currently not so
> easy in practice.
Yeah, rereading that old thread was interesting, and unfortunate that no
one mentioned the system catalog change would break pg_upgrade, though
pg_upgrade was not popular at the time that thread was started.
I think an open question is why you would not want to move the other
system tables at the same time you move pg_largeobject.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. +
+ Ancient Roman grave inscription +
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Greg Stark | 2016-10-19 16:30:03 | Re: [COMMITTERS] packing/alignment annotation for ItemPointerData redux |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2016-10-19 16:20:54 | Re: [COMMITTERS] packing/alignment annotation for ItemPointerData redux |