Re: PostgreSQL configuration

From: pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com
To: "Dennis Bjorklund" <db(at)zigo(dot)dhs(dot)org>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL configuration
Date: 2004-04-08 13:49:38
Message-ID: 18153.24.91.171.78.1081432178.squirrel@mail.mohawksoft.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> On Thu, 8 Apr 2004 pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com wrote:
>
>> more flexable configuration based on the idea that configuration and
>> data
>> are in SEPARATE locations is important.
>
> Why is it important and wouldn't it just make it harder to have several
> database clusters (for example with different locale) or several versions
> of pg installed at the same time?

My patch did not remove any functionality, it merely augmented it.

To say that it would make it more difficult to deploy multiple databases
is misleading for (2) reasons.

(1) It need not do that, because the configuration system would seem
unchanged for those who do not wish to use it in this way.

(2) I would bet that *most* deployments of PostgreSQL only use one
database environment per server, so I'm not even sure that it would be an
issue for the majority of current or prospective users.

It is all well and good to say "our way is better," (with which I do not
agree) but there are, more or less, if not "standards," "standard
concepts" from which good software design follows. Besides PostgreSQL,
name one popular open source project that is widely used that stores its
configuration information inside its data repository. From the "new user"
perspective, configuration within the data directory is an alien concept.

From a sysadmin perspective, having configuration in a standard location
makes sense. It makes these things easy to backup, archive, and put under
version control. (Many sysadmins put machine configuration under version
control to see what changes are made over time.)

Finally, I'm not suggesting removing any functionality, I am suggesting
that configuration can and should be able to be located in a standard
location and the the configuration be able to point to the data volume.

How many systems have you been asked to inspect for problems? It is one of
the things I do for a living. On many systems, I can just look in the
'/etc' directory for most of what I need. If they are running PostgreSQL,
I have to look around and figure out where the database is located.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2004-04-08 13:56:06 Re: locale
Previous Message Dennis Bjorklund 2004-04-08 13:25:16 Re: PostgreSQL configuration