вт, 12 окт. 2021 г. в 18:07, Vlad Khorsun <hv...@optima.com.ua>: > > 12.10.2021 17:53, Roman Simakov wrote: > > вт, 12 окт. 2021 г. в 13:11, Vlad Khorsun <hv...@optima.com.ua>: > >> > >> 12.10.2021 9:09, Roman Simakov wrote: > >>> пн, 11 окт. 2021 г. в 23:03, Vlad Khorsun <hv...@optima.com.ua > >>> <mailto:hv...@optima.com.ua>>: > > ... > > >>> > But MAIN exactly specifies the database itself. We especially > >>> have removed DEFAULT from the new version of the proposal > >>> because it's > >>> > better to explicitly require a tablespace name in the beginning. > >>> Later we can add defaults. > >>> > >>> I hope you don't require to use TABLESPACE clause every time ? > >>> If yes, you > >>> should define defaults anyway ;) > >>> > >>> > >>> Definitely not. > >> > >> Hmm... when object is creating and tablespace was not specified, we > >> must use something > >> (by default). Obvious choice is to use 'SYSTEM' tablespace, correct ? > > > > For tablespace yes. > > For tables, perhaps ?
Yes. Sorry. > > For indices the default tablespace is a tablespace > > of its table. > > Sure. I meant tables (and other "independent" objects, if any). > > ... > > >>> After DY's statement re. tablespace per partition, we should > >>> consider > >>> ability to create much more tablespaces. > >>> > >>> > >>> I see no problem with increasing the limit. I see problems with reducing > >>> it (someone may use them). So let's start from a small > >>> number 63. When we implement partitions we increase it more consciously. > >> > >> I speak about data type used in ODS for tablespace ID. It seems INT > >> should be used, > >> not SMALLINT. > > > > You suggest extending it in the PR or we can put it off? > > In the PR. It costs nothing but allows to avoid additional ODS changes. OK. -- Roman Simakov Firebird-Devel mailing list, web interface at https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-devel
