Alvaro Herrera <> writes:
> Stephen Frost escribió:
>> While I really like the 'include auto.conf' style, I'm starting to think
>> it may not be workable after all.  Another thing to consider is if the
>> user decides to change that include line..  What happens when the DBA
>> tries to do a 'ALTER SYSTEM'?  It'd still use the hard-coded auto.conf
>> file and happily update it, I imagine, but it won't actually get
>> included...

> Well, this whole line of discussion started because I objected to the
> whole code path that was trying to detect whether auto.conf had been
> parsed, and raised a warning if ALTER SYSTEM was executed and the file
> wasn't parsed.

I really, really don't think that we should be trying to detect or prevent
any such thing.  If the user breaks it like that, he gets to keep both
pieces --- and who's to say it's broken, anyway?  Disabling ALTER SYSTEM
might have been exactly his intent.

                        regards, tom lane

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to