| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com" <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: unite recovery.conf and postgresql.conf |
| Date: | 2011-09-24 17:49:05 |
| Message-ID: | F8473C8B-6534-458F-8866-770A13C1CE9A@gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sep 24, 2011, at 1:04 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> I don't exactly buy this argument. If postgresql.conf is hard to
> machine-edit, why is recovery.conf any easier?
Because you generally just write a brand-new file, without worrying about preserving existing settings. You aren't really editing at all, just writing.
>
>> What if we modified pg_ctl to allow passing configuration parameters
>> through to postmaster,
>
> You mean like pg_ctl -o?
Oh, cool. Yes, like that.
...Robert
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeff Janes | 2011-09-24 17:51:28 | Re: [PATCH] Log crashed backend's query (activity string) |
| Previous Message | Martijn van Oosterhout | 2011-09-24 17:37:52 | Re: Re: memory barriers (was: Yes, WaitLatch is vulnerable to weak-memory-ordering bugs) |