Re: SQL command to edit postgresql.conf, with comments

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndquadrant(dot)fr>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Darren Duncan <darren(at)darrenduncan(dot)net>, postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: SQL command to edit postgresql.conf, with comments
Date: 2010-10-13 16:56:15
Message-ID: 28662.1286988975@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> But creating a separate file doesn't fix that problem. It just moves
> it around. If people will expect comments in postgresql.conf to get
> preserved, then why won't they also expect comments in
> postgresql.conf.auto to get preserved?

Because postgresql.conf.auto will have a nice leading comment telling
people (1) not to hand-edit the file, (2) if they do so anyway,
not to expect comments to be preserved, and (3) the place to do manual
editing of settings is postgresql.conf.

> If the answer is "because postgresql.conf has always worked that way
> before", then add one more line to the proposed initial contents
> saying it's not true any more.

Sorry, wrong answer. The objection to this is not whether you tell
people that you're taking away the ability to keep useful comments
in postgresql.conf, it's that you're taking away the ability.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Radosław Smogura 2010-10-13 17:17:48 Re: [JDBC] Support for JDBC setQueryTimeout, et al.
Previous Message Tom Lane 2010-10-13 16:52:43 Re: leaky views, yet again