Tom Lane wrote:
> I am happy to design an arrangement that allows you not to depend on
> PGDATA if you don't want to.  But I don't see why you need to break
> my configuration procedures in order to fix yours.  As I outlined last
> night, it's possible to do what you want without breaking backwards
> compatibility for those that like PGDATA.

Yes, I agree.  I hadn't really thought of all the possible benefits of
PGDATA.  Sorry.  :-(

Would you agree that it would be a beneficial change to have pg_ctl
pass explicit arguments to postmaster?  It would go a long way towards
eliminating most of the situations I described.

A warning in the documentation about the consequences of using PGDATA
might not be a bad idea, either...

Kevin Brown                                           [EMAIL PROTECTED]

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

Reply via email to