On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 9:44 PM, Greg Stark <gsst...@mit.edu> wrote: > On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 5:41 PM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: >> That's probably not going to happen until we have a way to update >> postgresql.conf via SQL. Which, I maintain, as I have maintained >> before, is not going to happen until we get rid of the comments, >> because otherwise absolutely any implementation anyone proposes will >> get criticized for failing to handle them sensibly (because it is not >> possible to rewrite the file while handling the comments sensibly). >> > > So we've been over this. All the pieces you need are already there: > you can handle this without any nasty comment grunging by just writing > the new setting to a postgresql.auto and including that from > postgresql.conf. Include a note in postgresql.auto warning users any > changes in this file will be thrown away when the file is rewritten. > This is the same method used in .emacs.custom or a million other > places people wanted automatically written config files.
It seems that someone could have the following complaint: a setting configured in whichever file gets read first could potentially be ignored if it's also set in whichever file gets read second. And that might be confusing. Still, maybe we should just ignore that problem and do it anyway. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
