Is this NOT what I have been after for many months now.  I dropped the 
tablespace/location idea before 7.2 because that
didn't seem to be any interest.  Please see my past email's for the SQL commands and 
on disk directory layout I have
proposed.  I have a working 7.2 system with tablespaces/locations (what ever you want 
to call them,  I like locations
because tablespace are an Oracle thing).  I would like to get this code ported into 


> =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Hans-J=FCrgen_Sch=F6nig?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > how would you handle table spaces?
> The plan that's been discussed simply defines a tablespace as being a
> directory somewhere; physical storage of individual tables would remain
> basically the same, one or more files under the containing directory.
> The point of this being, of course, that the DBA could create the
> tablespace directories on different partitions or volumes in order to
> provide the behavior he wants.
> In my mind this would be primarily a cleaner, more flexible
> reimplementation of the existing "database location" feature.
>                       regards, tom lane
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?

Reply via email to