Re: A small update for postgresql.conf.sample

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: Devrim GÜNDÜZ <devrim(at)gunduz(dot)org>, Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info>, PostgreSQL Hackers ML <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: A small update for postgresql.conf.sample
Date: 2010-10-14 17:08:36
Message-ID: AANLkTi=9-sk0zCH6CJDNmse25xCxv_NR_msy58xxPz-n@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

2010/10/14 Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>:
> Robert Haas wrote:
>> 2010/9/27 Devrim G?ND?Z <devrim(at)gunduz(dot)org>:
>> > On Mon, 2010-09-27 at 09:40 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>> >> > Actually, I don't see any reason why not to backpatch it.
>> >>
>> >> I was wondering if it would cause package management headaches for
>> >> people who had already modified their postgresql.conf.
>> >
>> > We don't overwrite .conf files during upgrades.
>>
>> All right, have it your way.  Done.  :-)
>>
>> (Dang this is a lot easier than the old way.)
>
> Uh, I have always been reluctant to backpatch changes to
> postgresql.conf.sample because those changes are going to be installed
> in share/postgresql.conf.sample during a minor upgrade.  After that, if
> someone diffs their data/postgresql.conf with
> share/postgresql.conf.sample, they will see change that they did not
> make to postgresql.conf.
>
> Not sure you want to revert this changes, but I wanted to be sure people
> understood this behavior.

Yeah, I think the horse has left the barn on these changes, since they
are in 9.0.1 at this point, but it's certainly something to keep in
mind.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2010-10-14 17:10:28 Re: SQL command to edit postgresql.conf, with comments
Previous Message Robert Haas 2010-10-14 17:06:34 commitfest timing