Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@commandprompt.com> writes:
> Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of vie may 11 20:28:28 -0400 2012:
>> I'm astonished we don't do that already. Seems inconsistent with
>> other SQL object types - most obviously, schemas - and a potentially
>> giant foot-gun.
> The original patch did contain tablespace tracking (though I don't
> remember considering whether they were default or not), but it got
> ripped out because during the subsequent discussion we considered that
> it wasn't necessary to keep track of it -- supposedly, whenever you were
> going to delete a tablespace, the existing files in the directory would
> be sufficient evidence to stop the deletion. Evidently I failed to
> consider the case at hand.
Well, the question to me is exactly how much good it will do to stop
deletion of the pg_tablespace entry, if the underlying files are gone.
I'm having a hard time getting excited about expending cycles on that.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
