Re: Explicit configuration file

> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> 
> > I wonder if we should go one step further.  Should we be specifying the
> > config file on the command line _rather_ than the data directory. We
> > could then specify the data directory location in the config file.  That
> > seems like the direction we should be headed in, though I am not sure it
> > is worth the added headache of the switch.
> 
> That is what the patch I submitted does.
> 
> In the postgresql.conf file, you can specify where the data directory
> is, as well as the pg_hba.conf file exists.
> 
> The purpose I had in mind was to allow sharing of pg_hba.conf files and
> keep configuration separate from data.

My issue is that once we put the data directory location in
postgresql.conf, we can't share that with other installs because they
need different data locations, so what have we really gained _except_
having the *.conf file in a different location.

Seems any solution will need to allow the *.conf file itself to be
shared.

Here is an idea.  Allow multiple -C parameters to be used, with the
files read in order, with newer parameters overriding older ones.  Seems
this would be better than #includes.

Now that I think of it, #include does the same thing.  Instead of
multiple -C, we have one file per instance and #include the global one,
then set whatever we want.

One major thing this does that _symlinks_ do not do is allow most
parameters to be set globally for postgresql.conf, and for individual
instances to override _part_ of the global file.

Sorry I did not read the patch earlier.  I was more responding to the
emails.

--  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610)
853-3000+  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill,
Pennsylvania19026