On Mon, 2008-03-17 at 13:23 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > I'm not wedded to "forks", that's just the name that was used in the > only previous example I've seen. Classic Mac had a "resource fork" > and a "data fork" within each file. > > Don't think I like "maps" though, as (a) that prejudges what the > alternate forks might be used for, and (b) the name fails to be > inclusive of the data fork. Other suggestions anyone?
I believe that in the world of NTFS the concept is called "streams": http://support.microsoft.com/kb/105763. HTH, Mark. -- Mark Cave-Ayland Sirius Corporation - The Open Source Experts http://www.siriusit.co.uk T: +44 870 608 0063 -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
