Tom Lane wrote: > Fabien COELHO <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > I disagree on the view that being able to restore a database on another > > machine after a crash is an "abstract second-order goal";-) > > > ISTM that the core business of a database is to help organize and protect > > data, and it is plainly that. You just wish you won't need it, so it is > > somehow "abstract", but when and if you need it, it is not "second-order" > > at all;-) and it is much too late to redo the dump. > > So you create some tablespaces by hand. Big deal. This objection is > not strong enough to justify an ugly, klugy definition for where tables > get created. > > If tablespaces had to be associated with physically distinct devices > then there would be merit in your concerns, but they are only > directories and so there is no reason that you cannot create the same > set of tablespace names on your new machine that you had on your old.
I am confused. I thought Tom's argument was that we shouldn't add an overly complex tablespace SET variable just to prevent the non-standard TABLESPACE in CREATE, which I can understand. However, the text above seems to indicate we don't need an 'ignore tablespace specification if it does not exist' which I think we do need for cases where we want to restore on to a system that doesn't use tablespaces or for non-super-user restores. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
