From: | Doug McNaught <doug(at)wireboard(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Lamar Owen <lamar(dot)owen(at)wgcr(dot)org>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, mlw <markw(at)mohawksoft(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Explicit config patch 7.2B4 |
Date: | 2001-12-17 05:06:22 |
Message-ID: | m34rmqe8q9.fsf@belphigor.mcnaught.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> That's been Mark's primary argument all along, and what it ignores is
> that the standard behavior for daemons is designed around the assumption
> that a system is running only one copy of any given daemon. That's a
> fine assumption for most daemons but an unacceptable one for Postgres.
I'd say that's not completely accurate. I've seen and run sites with
more than one {httpd, sendmail} running. The basic idea is:
* If no config file is specified, either look for it in a standard
place, or complain bitterly. Sendmail looks for /etc/sendmail.cf
(usually); Apache looks in a place configured at compile time
(/etc/httpd/conf/httpd.conf on RedHat systems).
* If a config file *is* specified, use it. It tells you where to look
for other stuff (queue directory, webserver root or whatever).
The above scheme is used by many different daemons and is *perfectly*
conducive to running multiple copies. What makes you say it isn't?
> I'm prepared to accept some kind of compromise on this issue, but I'm
> really tired of hearing the useless "other daemons do it this way"
> argument. Could we hear some more-relevant argument?
How is a patch that (a) perfectly preserves existing behavior, and (b)
allows for more flexibility in configuration, a bad thing?
I'm not going to lose a lot of sleep if Mark's patch isn't adopted. I
will say, however, that as a long-time Un*x sysadmin (Ultrix, Irix,
Solaris, BSD, Linux) PG's method of configuration struck me as a bit
weird when I first saw it. It obviously does the job, but I like the
idea of giving users and packagers a configuration method that's still
sufficiently flexible and is more familiar to some.
My $0.02...
-Doug
--
Let us cross over the river, and rest under the shade of the trees.
--T. J. Jackson, 1863
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2001-12-17 05:30:59 | SunOS patch for memcmp() |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2001-12-17 04:13:12 | Re: Explicit config patch 7.2B4 |