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

Re: Glitch in handling of postmaster -o options

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Justin Clift <justin(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Glitch in handling of postmaster -o options
Date: 2001-09-30 02:56:39
Message-ID: 329.1001818599@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Justin Clift <justin(at)postgresql(dot)org> writes:
> Retiring -o would seem like a good idea.

That was what I was thinking too.  I can think of ways to reimplement
-o options so that they work safely ... but is it worth the trouble?
AFAICS, -o options confuse both people and machines, and have no
redeeming value beyond supporting old startup scripts.  Which could
easily be updated.

Some judicious feature removal may be the best path here.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Jan WieckDate: 2001-09-30 04:40:49
Subject: Re: Pre-forking backend
Previous:From: Justin CliftDate: 2001-09-30 02:46:21
Subject: Re: Glitch in handling of postmaster -o options

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