> Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > Yes, seems user-editable files should go in pgsql/etc or pgsql/config.
> What? That'd mean you couldn't have different files for different
> installations, which'd be a severe handicap (at least for developers
> who are pretty likely to have multiple installations on one machine).
> Putting the active copies under the data/ directory is good.
I didn't think of that. Yes, I can see pgsql/data/config is better.
> Or did you really mean a new subdirectory like data/config/ ?
> I could live with that for new or reformatted config files. As long as
> pg_hba.conf (for example) doesn't change meaning/layout I'd rather leave
> it where it is.
Seems we can just move it. I really don't like people in /data, but
/data/config is OK. Of course, this is just my opinion. It just scares
me to have people doing edits in a directory with real tables.
I remember someone deleted pg_log last week because they thought it was
a log file. It just seems we have a mess in /data with too many
different types of files:
I myself am not totally sure of the use of all these.
Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Peter Eisentraut||Date: 2000-05-31 18:44:03|
|Subject: Re: SET FSYNC command?|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2000-05-31 17:23:57|
|Subject: Re: config files in /data |