Re: Options given both on cmd-line and in the config with different values
От | Honza Horak |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Options given both on cmd-line and in the config with different values |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 2d884859-1455-53bd-7821-c3e776569ac3@redhat.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Options given both on cmd-line and in the config with different values (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 4/14/21 7:55 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Honza Horak <hhorak@redhat.com> writes: >> I'm trying to understand what is happening in the following bug report: >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1935301 > >> The upgrade process makes it a bit more difficult, but it seems to boil >> down to this problem -- even when pg_ctl gets clear guidance where to >> find datadir using -D option on the command-line, it forgets this >> guidance once finding data_directory option in the postgresql.conf. > >> Is this the expected behavior actually? > > The rule actually is that -D on the command line says where to find > the configuration file. While -D is then also the default for where > to find the data directory, the config file can override that by > giving data_directory explicitly. > > This is intended to support situations where the config file is kept > outside the data directory for management reasons. If you are not > actively doing that, I'd recommend *not* setting data_directory > explicitly in the file. > > While I've not studied the bug report carefully, it sounds like the > update process you're using involves copying the old config file > across verbatim. You'd at minimum need to filter out data_directory > and related settings to make that safe. Thanks for explaining, it makes perfect sense. You're right that there is some dbdata directory moving involved, so in that case removing data_directory option from postgresql.conf makes sense. Thanks, Honza
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: