| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Ron Mayer <rm_pg(at)cheapcomplexdevices(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: TODO questions |
| Date: | 2005-08-25 05:32:01 |
| Message-ID: | 25503.1124947921@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Ron Mayer <rm_pg(at)cheapcomplexdevices(dot)com> writes:
> The most unambiguous behavior would be to not have
> commented out values in the config file at all.
Yeah, Robert Treat suggested that upthread, and I think it's been pushed
by others too.
The only argument I can see against it is that it'll take longer for the
system to process such a file; but do we really care about a few more
microseconds to respond to SIGHUP?
This does not address the problem that changing PGC_POSTMASTER values in
the file won't do anything without a postmaster restart. Greg Stark's
suggestion of marking each PGC_POSTMASTER variable with a warning
comment in postgresql.conf seems reasonable to me, though.
So, the low-tech solution to these gripes seems to be:
* uncomment all the entries in postgresql.conf
* add comments to flag the values that can't be changed by SIGHUP
Can we agree on taking these measures?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-08-25 06:09:10 | Re: TODO questions |
| Previous Message | Jim C. Nasby | 2005-08-25 05:05:38 | Re: Stuff running slooow |