Re: Thanks, naming conventions, and count()

On Sun, 29 Apr 2001, Bruce Momjian wrote:

> > I don't know the answers to these questions, which is why I'm asking them
> > ... if this is something safe to do, and doesn't break us again, then
> > sounds like a good idea to me too ...
>
> I was suggesting the symlinks purely for admin convenience.  The database
> would use only the numeric names.

Except that the database would have to maintain those links ... now you've
given something ppl are relying on being there, but, for some reason, a
symlink wasn't created, so they think their table doesn't exist?

I can even think of a situation, as unlikely as it can be, where this
could happen ... run out of inodes on the file system ... last inode used
by the table, no inode to stick the symlink onto ...

its a remote situation, but I've personally had it happen ...

I'd personally prefer to see some text file created in the database
directory itself that contains the mappings ... so that each time there is
a change, it just redumps that data to the dext file ... less to maintain
overall ...