* Peter Eisentraut (pete...@gmx.net) wrote: > In my mind, a conf.d directory is an extension of a single-file > configuration, and so it should be handled that way.
I'm apparently out on some funny limb with this thought, but I'll throw
it out there anyway- in my head, the 'postgresql.auto.conf' thing that
essentially ends up included as part of 'postgresql.conf' should be
handled the same way a single 'postgresql.conf' or 'conf.d' directory
is. Now, I've never particularly agreed with it, but at least on
Debian/Ubuntu, the /etc conf directories are owned by the postgres user
by default. I dislike the idea of separating the PG config into things
in /etc and things in PGDATA as it will make life more difficult for the
poor sysadmins trying to figure out what's going on.
Thanks,
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
