Re: registry vs. environment (was re:binary

Bruce Momjian wrote:

>Merlin Moncure wrote:
>
>
>>To all:
>>
>>I think there are a couple of things about this issue that have not been
>>completely thought out. Moving off of an environment based home
>>variable should not be taken lightly. Switching the runtime environment
>>variables to use the registry will have several unintended consequences:
>>
>>1. There are several warnings and messages in postgres that explicitly
>>make reference to environment variables...these now have to be changed
>>for the win32 port.
>>
>>2. Application software written in C for PostgreSQL ported from unix may
>>not necessarily work anymore (assumptions about PGDATA).
>>
>>3. Just like the registry, the env has a system and a user area to make
>>settings. By default, mysql puts it home directory into the system
>>area. Nobody on the mysql lists seems to have a problem with this.
>>
>>4. Manipulating the environment is generally easier (either using SET or
>>parameter invocation from the command line) and has little/no win32
>>centric coding.
>>
>>5. The PeerDirect port uses environment settings, and I found it easy to
>>work with...why fix something that isn't broken?
>>
>>
>
>The win32 TODO now has:
>
> Store settings in the registry and set environment variables in
> the process
>
>What additional things to we need to deal with if we go the direction of
>having the environment variables set from the registry and read-only in
>the process?
>
>
>

I'm not clear *which* settings it is proposed to set in the registry,
nor how possible it will be to override the settings, and with which
mechanism.

The nicest things might be those things like paths that we currently set
at configure time - making postgres more easily relocatable would be a
Good Thing (tm).

We need to ensure that using the registry still allows us to run
multiple instances and multiple installations on the same machine easily.

cheers

andrew