Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re-ordering .CONF params ... questions for this list

From: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
To: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re-ordering .CONF params ... questions for this list
Date: 2003-06-10 18:01:46
Message-ID: 200306101101.46304.josh@agliodbs.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacypgsql-hackerspgsql-performance
Folks,

We've been discussing this for a while on HACKERS.  However, I haven't been 
getting much feedback on the specific order proposed.

Attached is an outline of my proposed re-ordering of postgresql.conf.sample.   
Please send me comments.  I need to submit a patch by Thursday, so don't take 
too long.

This is an effort to make the order of run-time params in 
postgresql.conf.sample and in the docs more logical and less baffling to the 
new DBA.

Questions:
1) Should "enable_implicit_from" go in the "Version/Platform Compatibility" 
section where I have it now, or in "CLIENT CONNECTIONS-Statement Behavior", 
or somewhere else?

2) Where should "preload_libraries" go?   I'm very reluctant to start a 
"Misc." section.  Perhaps I should start a "LIBRARIES" section?

3) I have re-ordered each subsection somewhat.   The fixed ordering is based 
on:
        a) My guess at the frequency with which that option will be changed, 
with more common options toward the top of the subsection;
        b) Grouping for tightly related options and for options that cascade;
        c) where (a) and (b) are unclear, alpha order.
Does this order make sense looking at the file?

3) Should we use indenting in PostgreSQL.conf.sample?   I tend to think it 
would make the file easier to read, but I'm not sure what effect it would 
have, if any, on parsing the file and whether other people would find it easy 
to read.



-- 
-Josh Berkus
 Aglio Database Solutions
 San Francisco

Attachment: re_order_conf
Description: text/plain (2.5 KB)

Responses

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Vincent van LeeuwenDate: 2003-06-10 18:12:48
Subject: Re: FW: [ADMIN] Shared_buffers and kernel parameters, tuning
Previous:From: Bruno Wolff IIIDate: 2003-06-10 17:21:42
Subject: Re: FW: [ADMIN] Shared_buffers and kernel parameters, tuning

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2003-06-10 18:14:22
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] Postgresql & AMD x86-64
Previous:From: Peter EisentrautDate: 2003-06-10 17:47:15
Subject: Re: Character encoding

pgsql-advocacy by date

Next:From: Sagi BritemanDate: 2003-06-10 18:04:30
Subject: PostgreSQL success stories
Previous:From: Dann CorbitDate: 2003-06-10 17:57:22
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] MySQL gets $19.5 MM

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group