Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Yeah. I think the only sensible way to do this would be to provide an
> >> operating mode for the postgres executable that would just parse the
> >> config file and spit out requested values.
> > That would certainly solve the problem, though it would have to be
> > backpatched all the way back to 8.4, and it would require pg_upgrade
> > users to be on newer minor versions of Postgres.
> I would just say "no" to people who expect this to work against older
> versions of Postgres. I think it's sufficient if we get this into HEAD
> so that it will work in the future.
Well, it is going to work in the future only when the _old_ version is
9.2+. Specifically, pg_upgrade using the flag could be patched to just
9.2, but the flag has to be supported on old and new backends for that
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Alexander||Date: 2011-09-30 00:54:22|
|Subject: Re: REVIEW proposal: a validator for configuration files|
|Previous:||From: Michael Paquier||Date: 2011-09-29 23:27:08|
|Subject: Re: pg_regress input/output directory option|