From mauricio@cristorei.com.br Fri Jun  7 19:43:49 2002
Received: from localhost.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8])
	by localhost (Postfix) with ESMTP id E942F476492
	for <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>; Fri,  7 Jun 2002 15:43:49 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from cristorei.cristorei.com.br (cristorei.cristorei.com.br
	[200.230.89.99])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09605476A18
	for <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>; Fri,  7 Jun 2002 15:12:30 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mauricio (200.230.89.131 [200.230.89.131]) by
	cristorei.cristorei.com.br with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange
	Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2653.13)
	id M3NLTH5N; Fri, 7 Jun 2002 16:12:29 -0300
Message-ID: <005a01c20e57$3dbdfcc0$8359e6c8@cristorei.com.br>
From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Maur=EDcio_Sessue_Otta?= <mauricio@cristorei.com.br>
To: <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>
Subject: Limiting database size
Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2002 16:11:58 -0300
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0057_01C20E3E.0C7EE840"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
X-Archive-Number: 200206/82
X-Sequence-Number: 8047

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0057_01C20E3E.0C7EE840
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi,  is there any way to limit the database size??

[]'s Mauricio


------=_NextPart_000_0057_01C20E3E.0C7EE840
Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2716.2200" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Hi,&nbsp; is there any way to limit the da=
tabase=20
size??</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>[]'s Mauricio</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0057_01C20E3E.0C7EE840--





From tulio@telecontrol.com.br Fri Jun  7 21:12:28 2002
Received: from localhost.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8])
	by localhost (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7978475BB1
	for <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>; Fri,  7 Jun 2002 17:12:28 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mail.telecontrol.com.br (200-206-158-62.dsl.telesp.net.br
	[200.206.158.62])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D290A47675E
	for <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>; Fri,  7 Jun 2002 17:06:59 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (qmail 2180 invoked from network); 7 Jun 2002 21:06:26 -0000
Received: from 200-206-158-62.dsl.telesp.net.br (HELO UebiMiau)
	(200.206.158.62) by 0 with SMTP; 7 Jun 2002 21:06:26 -0000
Received: from client 192.168.0.55 for UebiMiau (webmail client);
	Fri, 7 Jun 2002 18:06:26 -0300
Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2002 18:06:26 -0300
From: Tulio Oliveira <tulio@telecontrol.com.br>
To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Maur=EDcio_Sessue_Otta?= <mauricio@cristorei.com.br>,
	<pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>
Reply-To: Tulio Oliveira <listas@marilia.com>
Subject: Re: Limiting database size
X-Priority: 3
X-Mailer: UebiMiau 2.5
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MSMail-Priority: Medium
Importance: Medium
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1";
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <20020607210659.D290A47675E@postgresql.org>
X-Archive-Number: 200206/107
X-Sequence-Number: 8072

Hello, Mr. Bruce da Silva LEE,

Put the Database directory into a pre-sized partition.

Regards,


--
Tulio Oliveira
Internet DBA
Telecontrol Networking


--------- Mensagem Original --------
De: Maurício Sessue Otta <mauricio@cristorei.com.br>
Para: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>
Assunto: [SQL] Limiting database size
Data: 07/06/02 17:36

> Hi,  is there any way to limit the database size??
>
> []'s Mauricio
>
>
>




From josh@agliodbs.com Fri Jun  7 21:42:30 2002
Received: from localhost.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8])
	by localhost (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9053647611C
	for <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>; Fri,  7 Jun 2002 17:42:30 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from davinci.ethosmedia.com (davinci.ethosmedia.com [209.10.40.250])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A2F84764D6
	for <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>; Fri,  7 Jun 2002 17:41:51 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from [66.219.92.2] (HELO chocolate-mousse)
	by davinci.ethosmedia.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.5.9)
	with ESMTP id 1510070; Fri, 07 Jun 2002 14:41:52 -0700
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
From: Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>
Reply-To: josh@agliodbs.com
Organization: Aglio Database Solutions
To: =?iso-8859-1?q?Maur=EDcio=20Sessue=20Otta?= <mauricio@cristorei.com.br>,
	<pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Limiting database size
Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2002 14:42:36 -0700
X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.4]
References: <005a01c20e57$3dbdfcc0$8359e6c8@cristorei.com.br>
In-Reply-To: <005a01c20e57$3dbdfcc0$8359e6c8@cristorei.com.br>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <200206071442.36850.josh@agliodbs.com>
X-Archive-Number: 200206/86
X-Sequence-Number: 8051

Mauricio,

> Hi,  is there any way to limit the database size??

First, this is a question for PGSQL-NOVICE or PGSQL-GENERAL, not this maili=
ng=20
list.

Second -- sort of.  You can put the database on its own hard drive partitio=
n.=20=20
Then the database will crash when it runs out of space -- so I'm not sure=
=20
that helps you.=20=20

Of course, with other RDBMSs, which have administrative settings for size=
=20
limits, the database shuts down when you're out of space.  So I'm not sure=
=20
how useful the whole idea is.

--=20
-Josh Berkus

______AGLIO DATABASE SOLUTIONS___________________________
                                        Josh Berkus
   Complete information technology 	josh@agliodbs.com
    and data management solutions 	(415) 565-7293
   for law firms, small businesses 	 fax 621-2533
    and non-profit organizations. 	San Francisco




From jboes@nexcerpt.com Mon Jun  17 17:55:41 2002
Received: from localhost.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8])
	by localhost (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE68D476457
	for <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 13:55:41 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from news.hub.org (news.hub.org [64.49.215.80])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42ACD4775F5
	for <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 12:52:03 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by news.hub.org (Postfix, from userid 8)
	id CC41B3819A7; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 12:52:00 -0400 (EDT)
From: Jeff Boes <jboes@nexcerpt.com>
X-Newsgroups: comp.databases.postgresql.sql
Subject: Re: Limiting database size
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 12:52:47 -0400
Organization: Nexcerpt, Inc.
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <ael43g$2bp2$1@news.hub.org>
References: <005a01c20e57$3dbdfcc0$8359e6c8@cristorei.com.br>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Complaints-To: news@hub.org
User-Agent: Pan/0.11.3 (Unix)
X-Comment-To: =?iso-8859-1?q?=22Maur=EDcio?= Sessue Otta"
	<mauricio@cristorei.com.br>
To: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
X-Archive-Number: 200206/220
X-Sequence-Number: 8185

On Fri, 07 Jun 2002 16:37:03 -0400, Maurício Sessue Otta wrote:

> Hi,  is there any way to limit the database size??

You can limit a table's size (row count) by means of a rule or trigger.
I don't think there's any good way to control the overall size (in bytes)
of a database. 

-- 
Jeff Boes                                      vox 616.226.9550 ext 24
Database Engineer                                     fax 616.349.9076
Nexcerpt, Inc.                                 http://www.nexcerpt.com
           ...Nexcerpt... Extend your Expertise



From nospam.ulrich.sprick@gmx.de Tue Jun  18 08:12:36 2002
Received: from localhost.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8])
	by localhost (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B3AE475A35
	for <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>; Tue, 18 Jun 2002 04:12:36 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from news.hub.org (news.hub.org [64.49.215.80])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F40854759BA
	for <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>; Tue, 18 Jun 2002 04:12:35 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by news.hub.org (Postfix, from userid 8)
	id 6585E3818DB; Tue, 18 Jun 2002 04:11:37 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Ulrich Sprick" <nospam.ulrich.sprick@gmx.de>
X-Newsgroups: comp.databases.postgresql.sql
Subject: Re: Limiting database size
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2002 10:11:38 +0200
Organization: Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <aempvp$n8r$1@news.hub.org>
References: <005a01c20e57$3dbdfcc0$8359e6c8@cristorei.com.br>
X-Complaints-To: news@hub.org
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
To: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
X-Archive-Number: 200206/225
X-Sequence-Number: 8190

Hi Mauricio

Novell, and i think windows and unix as well, have the disk quota feature.
The disk size assigned to a user can be limited. There should also be
warning levels in order to get the sysadmin noticed about a user running out
of space before it's too late. Try on a os related newsgroup, they should
know better!

ulli

"Maurício Sessue Otta" <mauricio@cristorei.com.br> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:005a01c20e57$3dbdfcc0$8359e6c8@cristorei.com.br...
> This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
>
> ------=_NextPart_000_0057_01C20E3E.0C7EE840
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
> Hi,  is there any way to limit the database size??
>
> []'s Mauricio






From emayo@pozicom.net Tue Jun  25 20:48:09 2002
Received: from localhost.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8])
	by localhost (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61D0847694E
	for <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>; Tue, 25 Jun 2002 16:48:09 -0400 (EDT)
Mailbox-Line: From emayo@pozicom.net  Tue Jun 25 16:48:09 2002
Received: from news.hub.org (news.hub.org [64.49.215.80])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 96065475C7F
	for <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>; Tue, 25 Jun 2002 15:48:57 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by news.hub.org (Postfix, from userid 8)
	id 2F754381927; Tue, 25 Jun 2002 15:48:10 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Eric" <emayo@pozicom.net>
X-Newsgroups: comp.databases.postgresql.sql
Subject: Re: Limiting database size
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2002 15:48:10 -0400
Organization: Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Lines: 41
Message-ID: <afahdp$n9p$1@news.hub.org>
References: <200206071442.36850.josh@agliodbs.com>
X-Complaints-To: news@hub.org
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
To: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.0 required=5.0
	tests=FROM_NAME_NO_SPACES,DOUBLE_CAPSWORD version=2.30
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Archive-Number: 200206/346
X-Sequence-Number: 8311

I like the idea of putting it on a hard disk or partition of fixed size and
waiting for the DB to simply crash.
hahaha

"Josh Berkus" <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote in message
news:200206071442.36850.josh@agliodbs.com...
> Mauricio,
>
> > Hi,  is there any way to limit the database size??
>
> First, this is a question for PGSQL-NOVICE or PGSQL-GENERAL, not this
mailing
> list.
>
> Second -- sort of.  You can put the database on its own hard drive
partition.
> Then the database will crash when it runs out of space -- so I'm not sure
> that helps you.
>
> Of course, with other RDBMSs, which have administrative settings for size
> limits, the database shuts down when you're out of space.  So I'm not sure
> how useful the whole idea is.
>
> --
> -Josh Berkus
>
> ______AGLIO DATABASE SOLUTIONS___________________________
>                                         Josh Berkus
>    Complete information technology josh@agliodbs.com
>     and data management solutions (415) 565-7293
>    for law firms, small businesses fax 621-2533
>     and non-profit organizations. San Francisco
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
> subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your
> message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
>







From josh@agliodbs.com Wed Jun  26 19:10:07 2002
Received: from localhost.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8])
	by localhost (Postfix) with ESMTP id B181D476DFF
	for <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>; Wed, 26 Jun 2002 15:10:07 -0400 (EDT)
Mailbox-Line: From josh@agliodbs.com  Wed Jun 26 15:10:07 2002
Received: from davinci.ethosmedia.com (davinci.ethosmedia.com [209.10.40.250])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3047F475FCE
	for <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>; Wed, 26 Jun 2002 14:09:51 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from [66.219.92.2] (HELO chocolate-mousse)
	by davinci.ethosmedia.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.5.9)
	with ESMTP id 1557598; Wed, 26 Jun 2002 11:09:49 -0700
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
From: Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>
Reply-To: josh@agliodbs.com
Organization: Aglio Database Solutions
To: "Eric" <emayo@pozicom.net>, pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Limiting database size
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 11:12:02 -0700
X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.4]
References: <200206071442.36850.josh@agliodbs.com> <afahdp$n9p$1@news.hub.org>
In-Reply-To: <afahdp$n9p$1@news.hub.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <200206261112.02982.josh@agliodbs.com>
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-3.4 required=5.0
	tests=IN_REP_TO
	version=2.30
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Archive-Number: 200206/355
X-Sequence-Number: 8320

Eric,

> I like the idea of putting it on a hard disk or partition of fixed size a=
nd
> waiting for the DB to simply crash.
> hahaha

Yeah.  <grin>   It's what MS SQL Server does, though.   As I said, I think =
the=20
whole concept of limiting database size in MB is fundamentally flawed.   I=
=20
mean, what's the database supposed to do when it runs out of space?

-Josh






From tg5027@citlink.net Wed Jun  26 23:29:35 2002
Received: from localhost.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8])
	by localhost (Postfix) with ESMTP id E46A5476E93
	for <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>; Wed, 26 Jun 2002 19:29:35 -0400 (EDT)
Mailbox-Line: From tg5027@citlink.net  Wed Jun 26 19:29:35 2002
Received: from relay02.roc.frontiernet.net (relay02.roc.frontiernet.net
	[66.133.131.35]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 3BA514767C5
	for <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>; Wed, 26 Jun 2002 18:42:47 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (qmail 9730 invoked from network); 26 Jun 2002 22:42:48 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO there) ([170.215.129.199]) (envelope-sender
	<tg5027@citlink.net>)
	by relay02.roc.frontiernet.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP
	for <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>; 26 Jun 2002 22:42:48 -0000
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
From: terry <tg5027@citlink.net>
To: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Limiting database size
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 19:07:40 -0400
X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.3.2]
References: <200206071442.36850.josh@agliodbs.com> <afahdp$n9p$1@news.hub.org>
	<200206261112.02982.josh@agliodbs.com>
In-Reply-To: <200206261112.02982.josh@agliodbs.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-Id: <20020626224247.3BA514767C5@postgresql.org>
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0
	tests=IN_REP_TO,FROM_NAME_NO_SPACES,FROM_ENDS_IN_NUMS,PORN_10
	version=2.30
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Archive-Number: 200206/356
X-Sequence-Number: 8321


>>  Yeah.  <grin>   It's what MS SQL Server does, though.   As I
>> said, I think the whole concept of limiting database size in
>> MB is fundamentally flawed.   I mean, what's the database
>> supposed to do when it runs out of space?

Display a window that says:

"Management has determined that this database shall not exceed 
XXXmb.  If your business function requires more disk space - take 
it up with your manager."

Limiting database size is not a problem for developers, unless 
they are unable/unwilling to explain to their management that 
disks are a whole lot less expensive than terminating a database  
application that depends them.

But then, M$ never takes any responsibility for the amount of 
disk space it wastes.....


terry 





From tswan@idigx.com Thu Jun  27 00:35:54 2002
Received: from localhost.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8])
	by localhost (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED2B4476A15
	for <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>; Wed, 26 Jun 2002 20:35:54 -0400 (EDT)
Mailbox-Line: From tswan@idigx.com  Wed Jun 26 20:35:54 2002
Received: from stubee.d2hosting.net (d2hosting.net [66.70.41.160])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E77E4476695
	for <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>; Wed, 26 Jun 2002 19:41:49 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from firewall.oxford.d2interactive.com
	(firewall.oxford.d2interactive.com [68.16.167.2])
	by stubee.d2hosting.net (8.11.6/linuxconf) with ESMTP id g5QNfpB15339;
	Wed, 26 Jun 2002 18:41:52 -0500
Received: from idigx.com (host128.oxford.d2interactive.com [192.168.0.128])
	by firewall.oxford.d2interactive.com (8.11.6/linuxconf) with ESMTP id
	g5QNfoS16601; Wed, 26 Jun 2002 18:41:51 -0500
Message-ID: <3D1A513D.30805@idigx.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 18:41:49 -0500
From: Thomas Swan <tswan@idigx.com>
Reply-To: tswan@idigx.com
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US;
	rv:1.0.0) Gecko/20020625
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: josh@agliodbs.com
Cc: Eric <emayo@pozicom.net>, pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Limiting database size
References: <200206071442.36850.josh@agliodbs.com> <afahdp$n9p$1@news.hub.org>
	<200206261112.02982.josh@agliodbs.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="------------050908030807040003020003"
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.8 required=5.0
	tests=NO_MX_FOR_FROM
	version=2.30
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Archive-Number: 200206/358
X-Sequence-Number: 8323

--------------050908030807040003020003
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Josh Berkus wrote:

>Eric,
>
>>I like the idea of putting it on a hard disk or partition of fixed size and
>>waiting for the DB to simply crash.
>>hahaha
>>    
>>
>Yeah.  <grin>   It's what MS SQL Server does, though.   As I said, I think the 
>whole concept of limiting database size in MB is fundamentally flawed.   I 
>mean, what's the database supposed to do when it runs out of space?
>
Refuse updates, deletes, and inserts (from anything other than a DB 
superuser).  However you should be able to select data.  Once the 
database has exceeded its bounds, it would revert to read only status 
and wait for administrative intervention such as enlarging the quota 
(allocatable size) or altering the database to reduce its size.

Adding the checks wouldn't break existing databases if you defaulted the 
checks to off.

This could also significantly help in hosting situations by preventing a 
client for exceeding a specified quota and taking over the allocated 
area for the postgres database.

Thinking about it, it seems like a good safety feature (aside from good 
partitioning and system layout to begin with).





--------------050908030807040003020003
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
  <title></title>
</head>
<body>
Josh Berkus wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid200206261112.02982.josh@agliodbs.com">
  <pre wrap="">Eric,</pre>
  <blockquote type="cite">
    <pre wrap="">I like the idea of putting it on a hard disk or partition of fixed size and
waiting for the DB to simply crash.
hahaha
    </pre>
  </blockquote>
  <pre wrap=""><!---->Yeah.  &lt;grin&gt;   It's what MS SQL Server does, though.   As I said, I think the 
whole concept of limiting database size in MB is fundamentally flawed.   I 
mean, what's the database supposed to do when it runs out of space?</pre>
</blockquote>
Refuse updates, deletes, and inserts (from anything other than a DB superuser).
&nbsp;However you should be able to select data. &nbsp;Once the database has exceeded
its bounds, it would revert to read only status and wait for administrative
intervention such as enlarging the quota (allocatable size) or altering the
database to reduce its size.<br>
<br>
Adding the checks wouldn't break existing databases if you defaulted the
checks to off.<br>
<br>
This could also significantly help in hosting situations by preventing a
client for exceeding a specified quota and taking over the allocated area
for the postgres database.<br>
<br>
Thinking about it, it seems like a good safety feature (aside from good partitioning
and system layout to begin with).<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>

--------------050908030807040003020003--