| From: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Why conf.d should be default, and auto.conf and recovery.conf should be in it |
| Date: | 2014-01-16 04:23:02 |
| Message-ID: | 20140116042302.GT2686@tamriel.snowman.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
* Peter Eisentraut (peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net) wrote:
> In my mind, a conf.d directory is an extension of a single-file
> configuration, and so it should be handled that way.
I'm apparently out on some funny limb with this thought, but I'll throw
it out there anyway- in my head, the 'postgresql.auto.conf' thing that
essentially ends up included as part of 'postgresql.conf' should be
handled the same way a single 'postgresql.conf' or 'conf.d' directory
is. Now, I've never particularly agreed with it, but at least on
Debian/Ubuntu, the /etc conf directories are owned by the postgres user
by default. I dislike the idea of separating the PG config into things
in /etc and things in PGDATA as it will make life more difficult for the
poor sysadmins trying to figure out what's going on.
Thanks,
Stephen
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2014-01-16 04:23:40 | Re: INSERT...ON DUPLICATE KEY LOCK FOR UPDATE |
| Previous Message | Jan Kara | 2014-01-16 02:58:46 | Re: [Lsf-pc] Linux kernel impact on PostgreSQL performance |