Magnus Hagander wrote:
On Wed, Feb 20, 2008 at 06:14:27PM -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 09:42:02 -0500
Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
All this discussion seems to me to be going off into the clouds,
where every objection is met with some still more elaborate scheme. I
think we need to look at simple, incremental, and if possible
backwards compatible changes.
The simplest solution I can think of is:
Have a table pg_configuration (pg_settings?).
Allow that table to be inserted into but not updated or deleted from.
<snip>
This pretty much kills the ability for people who *want* to edit things
from the config file only, right? I don't think that's acceptable. At least
not if it's at all avoidable, which I think it is.
I did mention in a reply that it could be optional :).
Joshua D. Drake
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
