On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 05:24:54PM +0200, Andres Freund wrote: > On 2013-05-03 16:11:13 +0100, Greg Stark wrote: > > On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 1:12 AM, Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote: > > > I was more thinking of the idea of having some status on the first page > > > that might need to change in a future release. > > > > Incidentally, another option might be to have a <relfilenode>.meta > > fork that has information like this. It doesn't fundamentally change > > anything but it does mean that code that doesn't need to know about it > > doesn't need to know to skip the first page. It also means we could > > maybe expand it more easily. There have been previous wishlist items > > to have some meta information so external tools can more easily parse > > the data without needing access to the full catalog for example. > > The problem with an extra metadata fork is that it essentially would > double the files in a cluster and it would also noticeably increase the > amount of open files we need. > There have been quite some complaints about CREATE DATABASE speed, I > am not sure we want to make it even slower :(
Agreed. We start to get into file system performance issues at that point. I have often wondered if we need to create hash the files into subdirectories for databases with many tables. Has anyone profiled this? -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
