Re: location of the configuration files

From: Kevin Brown <kevin(at)sysexperts(dot)com>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: location of the configuration files
Date: 2003-02-12 06:43:00
Message-ID: 20030212064300.GD1833@filer
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

mlw wrote:
> AFAIK it wasn't actually done. It was more of a, "we should do something
> different" argument. At one point it was talked about rewriting the
> configuration system to allow "include" and other things.

That seems like extreme overkill. The PostgreSQL configuration
mechanism doesn't seem to me to be anywhere near complicated enough to
justify an "include" mechanism.

I agree with you: you should be able to specify all of the base
configuration information (including the location of the data
directories) in one file, and it makes perfect sense to me for the
location of the data directory to be a GUC variable.

I'd say the only thing the postmaster needs to know prior to startup
is the directory containing the postgresql.conf file. An
administrator who wishes to set up multiple independent databases can
easily do so by using multiple config file directories. When
consistency is required, he can easily use symlinks to point to master
config files where appropriate.

I assume $PGDATA was around long before GUC?

--
Kevin Brown kevin(at)sysexperts(dot)com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dann Corbit 2003-02-12 06:56:37 Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL Benchmarks
Previous Message Curt Sampson 2003-02-12 06:34:06 Re: Windows SHMMAX (was: Default configuration)