Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Proposed WAL changes

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Hiroshi Inoue" <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: Proposed WAL changes
Date: 2001-03-06 15:33:38
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
"Hiroshi Inoue" <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp> writes:
>> Remove archdir from pg_control; it ought to be a GUC
>> parameter, not a special case (not that it's implemented yet anyway).

> Is archdir really a GUC parameter ?

Why shouldn't it be?  I see nothing wrong with changing it on-the-fly.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2001-03-06 15:51:04
Subject: Re: There is error at the examples in PL/pgSQL
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2001-03-06 15:28:56
Subject: Re: AW: WAL-based allocation of XIDs is insecure

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group