From: | Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Re: Proposal for Allow postgresql.conf values to be changed via SQL [review] |
Date: | 2013-03-04 01:55:34 |
Message-ID: | 5133FF16.5090905@2ndQuadrant.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 3/3/13 8:34 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Neither of those names is consistent with any other PGDATA subdirectory
> name we use. It should just be config, or perhaps pg_config, though the
> latter risks confusion with the tool of the same name.
I'd be just as happy with config/ as the directory name. I have a bias
toward wanting this to look like Apache that I've been scolded for
before, I forgot to avoid that this time.
> FWIW, I do think that having "auto" or some such in the file name(s)
> would be a good idea, to help warn people off editing them manually.
I can see that for the file name itself, as long as it's not in the
directory name. I don't like giving the idea that everything in there
is automatically generated. config/persistent-auto.conf or
config/persist-auto.conf maybe?
The way files are sorted by name means that using
config/auto-persist[ent].conf would make the file more likely to be
processed before other things in that directory. I could live with that
order too. I think it is important to name the file such that it
suggests being connected to the SET PERSISTENT feature though.
--
Greg Smith 2ndQuadrant US greg(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com Baltimore, MD
PostgreSQL Training, Services, and 24x7 Support www.2ndQuadrant.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Greg Smith | 2013-03-04 02:05:31 | Re: Suggested new CF status: "Pending Discussion" |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2013-03-04 01:34:12 | Re: Re: Proposal for Allow postgresql.conf values to be changed via SQL [review] |