Re: A smaller default postgresql.conf

From: Joshua Drake <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Hans-Juergen Schoenig <postgres(at)cybertec(dot)at>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: A smaller default postgresql.conf
Date: 2008-08-19 15:51:50
Message-ID: 20080819085150.2e2a1945@jd-laptop
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, 19 Aug 2008 17:11:49 +0200
Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:

> Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > Hans-Juergen Schoenig wrote:
> >
> >> alternatively we could use some sort of "#include" mechanism to
> >> split "most important" and "not so important".
> >
> > We already have an "include" mechanism.
> Using that to include a file that's full of comments anyway (which is
> all that's left in postgresql.conf at this time, I'm sure) just seems.
> Well. Sub-optimal.

Yes but part of this idea is valid. The fact is the majority of the
postgresql.conf parameters don't need to be in there by default. It
just makes the file an intimidating mess for newbies and I am not
talking about just n00bs but also people coming from other environments
such as MSSQL.

I believe we could probably break the conf down to a reasonable 2 dozen
or less parameters. The rest should just be documented in our
documentation and call it good. We even have static URLs for this (I
seem to have dejavu with this as I am pretty sure I have had this
discussion already).

Joshua D> Drake

> //Magnus

The PostgreSQL Company since 1997:
PostgreSQL Community Conference:
United States PostgreSQL Association:
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project:

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dimitri Fontaine 2008-08-19 15:57:43 Re: Patch: plan invalidation vs stored procedures
Previous Message Kevin Grittner 2008-08-19 15:31:33 Re: Extending varlena