Re: Overhauling GUCS
От | David E. Wheeler |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Overhauling GUCS |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 3D652D3F-4642-4DC6-B883-E09240F196CE@kineticode.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Overhauling GUCS ("Heikki Linnakangas" <heikki@enterprisedb.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Overhauling GUCS
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Jun 5, 2008, at 23:08, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > What comments do we consider machine-generated? Just the ones used > to comment out settings, like > > #shared_buffers = 32MB > > or something else? Those and documentation comments. > If the automatic tool lets alone all other kind of comments, I think > we're fine. In fact, it wouldn't necessarily need to modify those > comments either, it could simply add a new setting line below that: > > #shared_buffers = 32MB > shared_buffers = 1024MB Well, we've been talking about having varying levels of documentation in the comments of the file based on the options passed to the configuration program. I think that these are the primary concern, though Greg, please do correct me if I'm mistaken. > For extra safety, it could comment out old settings, perhaps with > something like this: > > #shared_buffers = 32MB > #shared_buffers = 1024MB # commented out by wizard on 2008-06-05 > shared_buffers = 2048MB > > This would preserve a full change history in the file. It would > become quite messy after a lo of changes, of course, but a user can > trim the history by hand if he wants to. I guess that could be a feature. Personally, I use a vcs system for that. Best, David
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: