Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: > You're not alone on this at all: I agree 100%. I don't like your > proposed syntax, but I completely agree with your concern. I don't > see what's wrong with having the initial contents of postgresql.conf > look like this (these are the settings that are uncommented by default > on my machine):
> # type "man postgresql.conf" for help on editing this file > max_connections = 100 > shared_buffers = 32MB > datestyle = 'iso, mdy' > lc_messages = 'en_US.UTF-8' > lc_monetary = 'en_US.UTF-8' > lc_numeric = 'en_US.UTF-8' > lc_time = 'en_US.UTF-8' > default_text_search_config = 'pg_catalog.english' I'm not sure if anybody is particularly against the initial contents looking like that. The big problem, which both you and Dimitri are conveniently ignoring, is that if people are allowed to hand-edit the file they are going to introduce comments that no mechanical parser will do a nice job of preserving. And they're not going to be happy when SET PERMANENT has a side-effect of throwing away their comments. I don't see anything particularly wrong with Josh's proposal of keeping machine-generated and person-generated text in separate files. Dimitri complains that the behavior will be confusing if there are conflicting settings, but I think that's hogwash. We already have the ability for pg_settings to tell you which file, and even which line, set the active value of the setting. It's not going to be hard for people to figure that out. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers