Re: Permanent settings
От | Magnus Hagander |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Permanent settings |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20080220185601.GE27923@svr2.hagander.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Permanent settings (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Permanent settings
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Feb 20, 2008 at 01:43:46PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes: > > On Wed, Feb 20, 2008 at 01:27:25PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > >> For the point-and-drool crowd that can't cope with editing a text file, > >> perhaps the best avenue to having a GUI is to build it atop the > >> just-mentioned facility, namely > >> > >> 1. suck out the current settings. > >> 2. provide a GUI that manipulates the values. > >> 3. write back an entirely new postgresql.conf that doesn't take any > >> trouble to preserve what was there before. > > > That's what we have now, and it basically forces each frontend to do the > > implementatino themselevs. E.g. pgadmin has one implementation, phppgadmin > > has another implementation, apparantly Greg has one implementation, there > > may be third party ones out there with their own implementation. > > > The point is we need one implementatino that's in the server, because that > > takes away redundancy and it makes it easier to maintain. > > The main part of that is the GUI, which is certainly not going to be in > the server, so I fail to see exactly what you think you're really > gaining. The way things are now, writing the GUI is *simple* compared to the fact that you have to write a config file parser. One for each tool. The gain is exactly what I said above: we only need one implementation, not one for each potential tool using it, and the maintenance is easier should we ever decide to change how the config files are handled. //Magnus
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: