Re: PGXLOG variable worthwhile?

From: Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com>
To: "scott(dot)marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Curt Sampson <cjs(at)cynic(dot)net>, PostgreSQL Hackers Mailing List <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: PGXLOG variable worthwhile?
Date: 2002-09-25 19:17:42
Message-ID: 3D920BD6.F4DE033F@Yahoo.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

"scott.marlowe" wrote:

> Having a FILE called pg_xlog isn't the fix here, it's the result of the
> fix, which is to take all the steps of moving the pg_xlog directory and
> put them into one script file the user doesn't need to understand to do it
> right. I.e. idiot proof the system as much as possible.

And your script/program cannot modify postgresql.conf instead of
creating a new file?

Please remember: "A fool with a tool is still a fool". You can
provide programs and scripts as many as you want. There have
allways been these idiots who did stuff like truncating pg_log
...

Jan

--

#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being
right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive
me. #
#==================================================
JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com #

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2002-09-25 19:18:52 Re: PGXLOG variable worthwhile?
Previous Message Jan Wieck 2002-09-25 19:07:12 Re: PGXLOG variable worthwhile?