Tom Lane wrote:
> "Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > You don't :vote: on stuff like this ...
> Why not, exactly?
> I wasn't aware that any of core had a non-vetoable right to apply
> any patch we liked regardless of the number and strength of the
> objections. AFAIK, we resolve differences of opinion by discussion,
> followed by a vote if the discussion doesn't produce a consensus.
> It was pretty clear that Thomas' original patch lost the vote, or
> would have lost if we'd bothered to hold a formal vote. I don't
> see anyone arguing against the notion of making XLOG location more
> easily configurable --- it was just the notion of making it depend
> on environment variables that scared people.
And AFAICS it is scary only because screwing that up will simply corrupt
your database. Thus, a simple random number (okay, and a timestamp of
initdb) in two files, one in $PGDATA and one in $PGXLOG would be a
totally sufficient safety mechanism to prevent starting with the wrong
Can we get that instead of ripping out anything?
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me. #
#================================================== [EMAIL PROTECTED] #
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]