Hi, Hi,
On 2018-05-26 10:08:57 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Not sure about the relative-path idea. Seems like that would create > a huge temptation to put tablespaces inside the data directory, which > would force us to deal with that can of worms. It doesn't seem impossible to normalize the path, and then check for that. > Also, to the extent that people use tablespaces for what they're > actually meant to be used for (ie, putting some stuff into a different > filesystem), I can't see a relative path being helpful. Admins don't > go mounting disks at random places in the filesystem tree. I'm not convinced by that argument. It can certainly make sense to mount several filesystems relative to a subdirectory. And then there's the case we're talking about, where you have primary/standby on a single system. It's not like we'd *force* relative tablespaces... Greetings, Andres Freund