Re: Big 7.1 open items

"Philip J. Warner" <pjw(at)rhyme(dot)com(dot)au> writes:
> If these are true, then why not create a utility (eg. pg_update_symlinks)
> that creates the relevant symlinks. It does not matter if they are
> outdated, from an integrity point of view, and for the most part they can
> be automatically maintained. Internally, postgresql can totally ignore them.

What?

I think you are confusing a couple of different things. IIRC, at one
time when we were just thinking about ALTER TABLE RENAME, there was
a suggestion that the "real" table files be named by table OID, and
that there be symlinks to those files named by logical table name as
a crutch (:-)) for admins who wanted to know which table file was which.
That could be handled as you've sketched above, but I think the whole
proposal has fallen by the wayside anyway.

The current discussion of symlinks is focusing on using directory
symlinks, not file symlinks, to represent/implement tablespace layout.

regards, tom lane