On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 07:21:27PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> writes:
> > Agreed.  The attached patch modifies pg_check_dir() to report about
> > invisible and lost+found directory entries, and give more helpful
> > messages to the user.
> 
> I'm not terribly thrilled with special-casing 'lost+found' like that,
> since it's an extremely filesystem-dependent thing that even today
> probably only applies to a minority of our installed platforms.
> 
> The special case for dotfiles might be useful, not because of any
> connection to mount points but just because someone might forget
> that such could be lurking in a directory that "looks empty".

Yeah, I agree on both points.  I am not sure the patch is worth it just
the dot output.

Want a crazy idea?  '.' and '..' have different major device numbers on
the top directory of a mount point.  We could test for that and
prevent/warn about creating data directories on top-level directories of
mount points.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <br...@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

  + It's impossible for everything to be true. +


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Reply via email to