On 07/30/2013 10:10 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: >> Once we have consensus on these issues, then hopefully we can commit >> your patch. I don't *think* anyone is arguing with the code at this stage. > > There's one other thing, raised by Cédric upthread, about the multiple > files vs. single file. We decided on a single file because Greg said > many little files scattered in conf.d/ would be a mess; but if we're
That's not what I get out of the discussion thread. I believed we settled on One File because that's the patch Amit wrote, and a patch in the hand is worth two in WIP. > going to have two new items, one conf.d/ for snippets from external > tools (living in the config directory) and one for ALTER SYSTEM (living > in PGDATA), then the idea of going back to one setting per file is > perhaps not bad. On 07/30/2013 10:28 AM, Greg Stark wrote:> On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 6:10 PM, Alvaro Herrera > Well more to the point, if we conf.d for sysadmins to drop in extra > snippets in a different place then we could drop conf.d in PGDATA > since there's no need for it any more and just have auto.conf in > PGDATA directly. That assumes that the only reason we have for a conf.d is to support auto.conf, which I don't agree with; I personally have a need for conf.d which has nothing to do with auto.conf. Also, see gsmith's point about forcing auto.conf to be in PGDATA as not satisfactory for Debian users (and others). -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL Experts Inc. http://pgexperts.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
