| From: | teg(at)redhat(dot)com (Trond Eivind =?iso-8859-1?q?Glomsr=F8d?=) |
|---|---|
| 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>, The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>, Florent Guillaume <efgeor(at)noos(dot)fr>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Re: Sure enough, the lock file is gone |
| Date: | 2001-01-28 17:49:20 |
| Message-ID: | xuyelxnzhwf.fsf@halden.devel.redhat.com |
| 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:
> It would probably be better if the socket files weren't in /tmp but in
> a postgres-owned directory. However, at this point we have a huge
> backwards compatibility problem to overcome if we want to move the
> socket files.
Not to sound scheptical, but since when did postgresql care about
backwards compatiblity? Upgrading is already demanding a lot of
knowledge from the user (including needing such information, which
almost no other package do), this is just a minor change (the files
are mostly used by bundled tools - any exceptions?)
> There is an option in 7.1 to support defining a different directory
> for the socket files, but I doubt very many people will use it.
I intend to, for the RPMs we ship.
--
Trond Eivind Glomsrød
Red Hat, Inc.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2001-01-28 18:22:26 | Re: Re: Sure enough, the lock file is gone |
| Previous Message | Constantin S. Svintsoff | 2001-01-28 08:04:04 | Re: Open 7.1 items |