Re: config files in /data

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: config files in /data
Date: 2000-06-02 00:43:35
Message-ID: 8670.959906615@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> Tom Lane writes:
>> The distinction between /global and /internal is a little bit artificial
>> (which one does pg_log belong in? It's only sort of a table...),

> Is there any reason these special tables are catalogued?

I can't think of a reason to catalog pg_log offhand, but maybe Vadim
knows one...

> Also, with the catalog version number, is there any more use for the
> PG_VERSION file?

Sure. The catalog number is just for internal purposes; you can't use
it (easily) to tell which release you have. PG_VERSION is more
appropriate for user interface purposes. Also, consider pg_upgrade:
it wouldn't have any simple way of checking for compatibility without
PG_VERSION.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2000-06-02 00:52:35 Re: disbursion again
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2000-06-02 00:37:12 Re: AW: AW: Proposal for enhancements of privilege system