On 16 August 2012 04:00, Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote: > On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 12:32:13PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: >> Thom Brown wrote: >> > > So if one set PGDATA to somewhere which had no database files at all, >> > > but just postgresql.conf, it could still work (assuming it, in turn, >> > > set data_directory correctly), but not vice versa. ?It would make more >> > > sense to call it PGCONFIG, although I'm not proposing that, especially >> > > since PGDATA makes sense when it comes to initdb. >> > > >> > > There are probably plenty of other places in the docs which also don't >> > > adequately describe PGDATA or -D. >> > > >> > > Any disagreements? ?If not, should I write a patch (since someone will >> > > probably accuse me of volunteering anyway) or would someone like to >> > > commit some adjustments? >> > >> > No opinions on this? >> >> Yes. I had kept it to deal with later. Please work on a doc patch to >> try to clean this up. pg_upgrade just went through this confusion and I >> also was unhappy at how vague things are in this area. >> >> Things got very confusing with pg_upgrade when PGDATA pointed to the >> configuration directory and the data_directory GUC pointed to the data >> directory. > > I have applied the attached doc patch for PG 9.3 to clarify PGDATA.
Thanks Bruce. -- Thom -- Sent via pgsql-docs mailing list (pgsql-docs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-docs
