RE: Big 7.1 open items

Hiroshi Inoue <inoue@tpf.co.jp>

From: "Hiroshi Inoue" <Inoue@tpf.co.jp>

To: "Bruce Momjian" <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>

Cc: "Tom Lane" <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, "Jan Wieck" <JanWieck@yahoo.com>, "PostgreSQL-development" <pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org>, "Ross J. Reedstrom" <reedstrm@rice.edu>, "Don Baccus" <dhogaza@pacifier.com>

Date: 2000-06-19T16:17:14Z

Lists: pgsql-hackers

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bruce Momjian [mailto:pgman@candle.pha.pa.us]
> 
> The fact is that symlink information is already stored in the file
> system.  If we store symlink information in the database too, there
> exists the ability for the two to get out of sync.  My point is that I
> think we can _not_ store symlink information in the database, and query
> the file system using lstat when required.
>

Hmm,this seems pretty confusing to me.
I don't understand the necessity of symlink.
Directory tree,symlink,hard link ... are OS's standard.
But I don't think they are fit for dbms management.

PostgreSQL is a database system of cource. So
couldn't it handle more flexible structure than OS's
directory tree for itself ?

Regards.

Hiroshi Inoue
Inoue@tpf.co.jp