Jonah, > Don't get me wrong, I think we need tablespace maximums. What I'm > looking at is a user/group-based quota which would allow a superuser to > grant say, 2G of space to a user or group. Any object that user owned > would be included in the space allocation. > > So, if the user owns three tablespaces, they can still only have a > maximum of 2G total. This is where I think it would be wise to allow > the tablespace owner and/or superuser to set the maximum size of a > tablespace.
Yeah, the problem is that with the upcoming "group ownership" I see user-based quotas as being rather difficult to implement unambiguously. Even more so when we get "local users" in the future. So I'd only want to do it if there was a real-world use case that tablespace quotas wouldn't satisfy. For the basic ISP space, tablespace quotas seem a lot more apt for that case. You give each user a database, and put it in its own tablespace and don't give them permissions to change it. That way you could have user e-mail, web, and database in the same directory tree for easy backup/transfer. It also means that you can use filesystem controls to double-check the tablespace maximums. -- --Josh Josh Berkus Aglio Database Solutions San Francisco ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend
