From: | "Takayuki Tsunakawa" <tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | "Bruce Momjian" <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: What is the motivation of include directive and |
Date: | 2007-01-17 05:18:55 |
Message-ID: | 01c201c739f6$fc1ebf40$19527c0a@OPERAO |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
From: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
> "Takayuki Tsunakawa" <tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com> writes:
>> Still, I don't understand well why config files need to be placed
>> outside the data directory, except for daring conform to FHS.
>
> The killer argument for it is that most of what is in $PGDATA should
be
> excluded from your normal filesystem backup method, because you need
to
> be using some database-aware mechanism for backing up the database.
But
> the config files are perfectly suited for standard filesystem
backup,
> and indeed will *not* be covered by, say, pg_dumpall. So putting
them
> somewhere else helps in creating a coherent backup strategy.
Thank you, I've understood the reason for placement. As I supposed,
it is provided mainly for placing config files in /etc to allow
frequent backup of the configuration as a whole system, because most
config files of UNIX are stored in /etc (recommended so in FHS) and
/etc is small.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Takayuki Tsunakawa | 2007-01-17 06:45:37 | Re: Idea for fixing the Windows fsync problem |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2007-01-17 04:50:31 | Re: What is the motivation of include directive and |