Re: [HACKERS] Sample configuration files

2016-09-30 Thread Michael Paquier
On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 2:50 PM, Vik Fearing wrote: > I wonder if it would be a good idea to have a postgresql.conf.d > directory that postgresql.conf would include_dir by default. These > could then live in there and all I would have had to do is uncomment the > values I

Re: [HACKERS] Sample configuration files

2016-09-28 Thread Vik Fearing
On 09/29/2016 05:55 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 2:25 AM, Robert Haas wrote: >> So, anyone else have an opinion, pro or con? > > Going through this thread, I'd vote -1. This is a documentation effort > mainly, and installing those files has zero

Re: [HACKERS] Sample configuration files

2016-09-28 Thread Michael Paquier
On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 2:25 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > So, anyone else have an opinion, pro or con? Going through this thread, I'd vote -1. This is a documentation effort mainly, and installing those files has zero effect if they are not loaded via include_if_exists or

Re: [HACKERS] Sample configuration files

2016-09-28 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 8:52 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Vik Fearing writes: >> I noticed that this patch has been marked Waiting on Author with no >> comment. Peter, what more should I be doing right now while waiting for >> Martín's review? > > FWIW, I agree

Re: [HACKERS] Sample configuration files

2016-09-08 Thread Tom Lane
Vik Fearing writes: > I noticed that this patch has been marked Waiting on Author with no > comment. Peter, what more should I be doing right now while waiting for > Martín's review? FWIW, I agree with the upthread misgivings about whether this is actually a useful effort.

Re: [HACKERS] Sample configuration files

2016-09-08 Thread Vik Fearing
On 08/29/2016 03:34 AM, Vik Fearing wrote: > We have sample configuration files for postgresql.conf and > recovery.conf, but we do not have them for contrib modules. This patch > attempts to add them. > > Although the patch puts the sample configuration files in the tree, it > doesn't try to

Re: [HACKERS] Sample configuration files

2016-09-02 Thread Martín Marqués
El 02/09/16 a las 04:19, Vik Fearing escribió: > >> 2. But I'm not sure that this will actually be useful to people. It >> seems like it might just be one more thing for patch authors to >> maintain. I think that if somebody wants to set a parameter defined >> for a contrib module, it's easy

Re: [HACKERS] Sample configuration files

2016-09-02 Thread Vik Fearing
On 09/02/2016 08:58 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 7:04 AM, Vik Fearing wrote: >> We have sample configuration files for postgresql.conf and >> recovery.conf, but we do not have them for contrib modules. This patch >> attempts to add them. >> >> Although

Re: [HACKERS] Sample configuration files

2016-09-02 Thread Robert Haas
On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 7:04 AM, Vik Fearing wrote: > We have sample configuration files for postgresql.conf and > recovery.conf, but we do not have them for contrib modules. This patch > attempts to add them. > > Although the patch puts the sample configuration files in the

Re: [HACKERS] Sample configuration files

2016-08-29 Thread Amit Kapila
On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 7:04 AM, Vik Fearing wrote: > We have sample configuration files for postgresql.conf and > recovery.conf, but we do not have them for contrib modules. This patch > attempts to add them. > > Although the patch puts the sample configuration files in the

[HACKERS] Sample configuration files

2016-08-28 Thread Vik Fearing
We have sample configuration files for postgresql.conf and recovery.conf, but we do not have them for contrib modules. This patch attempts to add them. Although the patch puts the sample configuration files in the tree, it doesn't try to install them. That's partly because I think it would need