| From: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
| Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: quoting and recovery.conf |
| Date: | 2010-05-28 02:42:50 |
| Message-ID: | AANLkTikvBiN7xF5b3svnCz6QrZNFmPQPVwhiq4ShbWv_@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 12:20 AM, Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> wrote:
> My suggestion is we should fold all the parameters into
> postgresql.conf and treat recovery.conf as an additional
> postgresql.conf to read. It would allow any GUC. The only difference
> is that it would be moved out of the way automatically when the target
> is reached.
I agree to move all the parameter to postgresql.conf. If we do so,
ISTM that it's not useful to leave recovery.conf as a configuration
file. Instead, how about treating recovery.conf as just a trigger
file for recovery? That is, only when recovery.conf is found, the
recovery parameters in postgresql.conf are used and an archive
recovery or standby server start.
If we should avoid a hard-code of a trigger file name, we can
introduce new GUC paramter specifying the path of that. Then a user
can focus on postgresql.conf about configuration. Thought?
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Scott Marlowe | 2010-05-28 02:46:21 | Re: merge join killing performance |
| Previous Message | KaiGai Kohei | 2010-05-28 02:30:36 | Re: [RFC] Security label support |