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

Re: Exposing an installation's default value of unix_socket_directory

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Exposing an installation's default value of unix_socket_directory
Date: 2011-02-27 22:40:46
Message-ID: 201102272240.p1RMekt10034@momjian.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Added to TODO:

	Allow simpler reporting of the unix domain socket directory and allow
	easier configuration of its default location 

	* http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2010-10/msg01555.php 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> > On tor, 2010-10-21 at 16:59 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Actually, the only reason this is even up for discussion is that
> >> there's
> >> no configure option to set DEFAULT_PGSOCKET_DIR.  If there were, and
> >> debian were using it, then pg_config --configure would tell what I
> >> wish
> >> to know.  I thought for a bit about proposing we add such an option,
> >> but given the current state of play it might be more misleading than
> >> helpful: as long as distros are accustomed to changing this setting
> >> via
> >> a patch, you couldn't trust pg_config --configure to tell you what a
> >> given installation actually has compiled into it.
> 
> > Presumably, if a configure option were added, they couldn't change it
> > via patch anymore.
> 
> Hm, you're right: we'd remove the pg_config_manual.h entry, so the
> existing patches would stop working, and presumably maintainers would
> figure out that they ought to use the configure switch instead.  So
> that argument holds little water.
> 
> > Btw., a configure option for this was rejected years ago to discourage
> > people from actually changing the default.
> 
> Yeah, I remember that discussion now that you mention it.  It still
> seems like a good policy ... but given that some popular packages are
> changing the default whether we think it's a good idea or not, maybe
> it's better to acknowledge that reality.  We could still have some
> text in the manual pointing out the compatibility hazards of using
> the switch, I guess.
> 
> 			regards, tom lane
> 
> -- 
> Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

  + It's impossible for everything to be true. +

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: David FetterDate: 2011-02-27 22:48:45
Subject: [OT] Christchurch
Previous:From: AntonDate: 2011-02-27 22:31:47
Subject: Fwd: Re: Native XML

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