| From: | Kevin Brown <kevin(at)sysexperts(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: location of the configuration files |
| Date: | 2003-02-14 15:10:03 |
| Message-ID: | 20030214151003.GA1833@filer |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> I am happy to design an arrangement that allows you not to depend on
> PGDATA if you don't want to. But I don't see why you need to break
> my configuration procedures in order to fix yours. As I outlined last
> night, it's possible to do what you want without breaking backwards
> compatibility for those that like PGDATA.
Yes, I agree. I hadn't really thought of all the possible benefits of
PGDATA. Sorry. :-(
Would you agree that it would be a beneficial change to have pg_ctl
pass explicit arguments to postmaster? It would go a long way towards
eliminating most of the situations I described.
A warning in the documentation about the consequences of using PGDATA
might not be a bad idea, either...
--
Kevin Brown kevin(at)sysexperts(dot)com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Greg Copeland | 2003-02-14 15:20:09 | Re: Incremental backup |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-02-14 15:07:45 | Re: Offering tuned config files |