Re: [HACKERS] Exposing an installation's default value of unix_socket_directory

2011-02-27 Thread Bruce Momjian
Added to TODO: Allow simpler reporting of the unix domain socket directory and allow easier configuration of its default location * http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2010-10/msg01555.php

Re: [HACKERS] Exposing an installation's default value of unix_socket_directory

2010-11-11 Thread Tom Lane
Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net writes: On tor, 2010-10-21 at 16:59 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: Actually, the only reason this is even up for discussion is that there's no configure option to set DEFAULT_PGSOCKET_DIR. If there were, and debian were using it, then pg_config --configure would tell

Re: [HACKERS] Exposing an installation's default value of unix_socket_directory

2010-11-11 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net writes: On tor, 2010-10-21 at 16:59 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: Actually, the only reason this is even up for discussion is that there's no configure option to set DEFAULT_PGSOCKET_DIR. If there were, and debian were using it, then pg_config

Re: [HACKERS] Exposing an installation's default value of unix_socket_directory

2010-11-10 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On tor, 2010-10-21 at 16:59 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: Actually, the only reason this is even up for discussion is that there's no configure option to set DEFAULT_PGSOCKET_DIR. If there were, and debian were using it, then pg_config --configure would tell what I wish to know. I thought for a

[HACKERS] Exposing an installation's default value of unix_socket_directory

2010-10-21 Thread Tom Lane
I just noticed that there doesn't seem to be any good way of finding out what a postmaster's default value of unix_socket_directory is. If you try to SHOW it you just get an empty string. We could probably fix things so that SHOW exposes the actual setting, but (1) there might be security

Re: [HACKERS] Exposing an installation's default value of unix_socket_directory

2010-10-21 Thread Cédric Villemain
2010/10/21 Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us: I just noticed that there doesn't seem to be any good way of finding out what a postmaster's default value of unix_socket_directory is. If you try to SHOW it you just get an empty string.  We could probably fix things so that SHOW exposes the actual

Re: [HACKERS] Exposing an installation's default value of unix_socket_directory

2010-10-21 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Excerpts from Cédric Villemain's message of jue oct 21 16:01:30 -0300 2010: I agree this is interesting information to get, but wonder how pg_config can know that and it looks to me that this information as nothing to do in pg_config pg_config is all about installation, socket_dir is a

Re: [HACKERS] Exposing an installation's default value of unix_socket_directory

2010-10-21 Thread Dimitri Fontaine
Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us writes: One possible response would be to add an item to what pg_config knows about, eg pg_config --socketdir. This doesn't answer every possible use-case either, but it would be helpful for some scenarios. Thoughts? Following some links one can find out

Re: [HACKERS] Exposing an installation's default value of unix_socket_directory

2010-10-21 Thread Tom Lane
Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com writes: Excerpts from Cédric Villemain's message of jue oct 21 16:01:30 -0300 2010: I agree this is interesting information to get, but wonder how pg_config can know that and it looks to me that this information as nothing to do in pg_config

Re: [HACKERS] Exposing an installation's default value of unix_socket_directory

2010-10-21 Thread Robert Haas
2010/10/21 Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us: Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com writes: Excerpts from Cédric Villemain's message of jue oct 21 16:01:30 -0300 2010: I agree this is interesting information to get, but wonder how pg_config can know that and it looks to me that this information

Re: [HACKERS] Exposing an installation's default value of unix_socket_directory

2010-10-21 Thread A.M.
On Oct 21, 2010, at 4:19 PM, Robert Haas wrote: 2010/10/21 Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us: Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com writes: Excerpts from Cédric Villemain's message of jue oct 21 16:01:30 -0300 2010: I agree this is interesting information to get, but wonder how pg_config can

Re: [HACKERS] Exposing an installation's default value of unix_socket_directory

2010-10-21 Thread Tom Lane
A.M. age...@themactionfaction.com writes: On Oct 21, 2010, at 4:19 PM, Robert Haas wrote: I think adding this to pg_config is sensible. Sure, the user could have moved the socket directory. But it's a place to start looking. So why not? Because pg_config is supposed to return the current