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
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
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

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

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