| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Shridhar Daithankar <shridhar_daithankar(at)persistent(dot)co(dot)in> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [GENERAL] Physical Database Configuration |
| Date: | 2003-06-26 16:22:27 |
| Message-ID: | 26064.1056644547@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
Shridhar Daithankar <shridhar_daithankar(at)persistent(dot)co(dot)in> writes:
> On Thursday 26 June 2003 21:29, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I can see no reason that we'd want a level of directory associated with
>> schemas...
> Moving a multi-hundreds-of-GB table across schemas would be sooo easy..:-)
No, it would be harder.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | nolan | 2003-06-26 16:26:50 | Re: [GENERAL] Physical Database Configuration |
| Previous Message | Shridhar Daithankar | 2003-06-26 16:07:13 | Re: [GENERAL] Physical Database Configuration |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | nolan | 2003-06-26 16:26:50 | Re: [GENERAL] Physical Database Configuration |
| Previous Message | Shridhar Daithankar | 2003-06-26 16:07:13 | Re: [GENERAL] Physical Database Configuration |