> > > The symlinks wouldn't do any good for what Bruce had in 
> > > mind anyway (IIRC, he wanted to get useful per-database
> > > numbers from "du").
> > 
> > Our database design seems to be in the opposite direction
> > if it is restricted for the convenience of command calls.
> 
> Well, I don't see any reason not to use tablespace/database 
> rather than just tablespace. Seems having fewer files in each directory

Once again - ability to use different tablespaces (disks) for tables/indices
in the same schema. Schemas must not dictate where to store objects <-
bad design.

> will be a little faster, and if we can make administration easier,
> why not?

Because you'll not be able use du/ls once we'll implement new smgr anyway.

And, btw, - for what are we going implement tablespaces? Just to have
fewer files in each dir ?!

Vadim

Tue, 27 Jun 2000 10:54:55 -0700
"Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev@SECTORBASE.COM>
RE: Big 7.1 open items
[ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ]
> > > > The symlinks wouldn't do any good for what Bruce had in 
> > > > mind anyway (IIRC, he wanted to get useful per-database
> > > > numbers from "du").
> > > 
> > > Our database design seems to be in the opposite direction
> > > if it is restricted for the convenience of command calls.
> > 
> > Well, I don't see any reason not to use tablespace/database 
> > rather than just tablespace. Seems having fewer files in each directory
> 
> Once again - ability to use different tablespaces (disks) for tables/indices
> in the same schema. Schemas must not dictate where to store objects <-
> bad design.

I am suggesting this symlink:

	ln -s data/base/testdb/myspace /var/myspace/testdb

rather than:

	ln -s data/base/testdb/myspace /var/myspace

Tablespaces still sit inside database directories, it is just that it
points to a subdirectory of myspace, rather than myspace itself.

Am I missing something?

> 
> > will be a little faster, and if we can make administration easier,
> > why not?
> 
> Because you'll not be able use du/ls once we'll implement new smgr anyway.

At least du will work.  I doubt we will be putting tables from different
databases in the same file.

> 
> And, btw, - for what are we going implement tablespaces? Just to have
> fewer files in each dir ?!

No, I thought it was to split files across drives.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://www.op.net/~candle
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 853-3000
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

Tue, 27 Jun 2000 14:18:07 -0400 (EDT)
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
Re: Big 7.1 open items