Re: Explicit config patch 7.2B4

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: mlw <markw(at)mohawksoft(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Explicit config patch 7.2B4
Date: 2001-12-16 22:23:39
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.30.0112161752370.641-100000@peter.localdomain
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

mlw writes:

> This allows
>
> postmaster -C /etc/pgsql/mydb.conf
>
> The "-C" option specifies a configuration file.

I'm still not happy about this, because given a pre-configured or already
running system it is difficult or impossible to find out which
configuration file is being used. This offsets in many ways the improved
usability you're trying to achieve.

I think an 'include' directive for postgresql.conf would solve this
problem more generally (since it allows many more sharing models) and
would also give us a good tool when we get to the configuration of
alternative storage locations.

Probably a command-line option could prove useful for testing purposes,
etc., but I feel that by default the configuration should be written down
in some easy-to-find file. This is consistent with the move away from
command-line options that we have made with postgresql.conf.

Probably we could make the option -C to mean "imagine an include directive
written at the very start [or end?] of $PGDATA/postgresql.conf". With the
default empty file this would achieve exactly the same thing as you're
trying.

Comments?

--
Peter Eisentraut peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2001-12-16 22:23:56 Re: [PATCHES] system catalog relation of a table and a
Previous Message Oleg Bartunov 2001-12-16 22:10:23 pgsql's datetime perl equivalent ?