Re: Thoughts on the location of configuration files

> >I suggest that we wire-in the location of the configuration files into the
> >binaries as ${sysconfdir} as determined by configure.  This would default
> >to /usr/local/pgsql/etc, so the "everything in one place" system is still
> >somewhat preserved for those that care.  For the confused, we could for a
> >while install into the data directory files named "postgresql.conf",
> >"pg_hba.conf", etc. that only contain text like "This file is now to be
> >found at @sysconfdir@ by popular demand."
> >
> In keeping with some of the more modern daemons (xinetd, etc) you might 
> want to consider something like /etc/pgsql.d/ as a directory name.   
>  Where as most folders with a .d contain a set of files or a referenced 
> by the main config file in /etc.  This is on a RedHat system, but I 
> think the logic applies well if you are flexible the location of the 
> base system config directory.   (/usr/local/etc vs /etc, etc.)

I often wondered, if it is directory, why do they need the '.d' in the
name?  What possible purpose could it have except to look ugly?  :-)

--  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