Re: unite recovery.conf and postgresql.conf
От | Joshua D. Drake |
---|---|
Тема | Re: unite recovery.conf and postgresql.conf |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4E7CB1E6.5050207@commandprompt.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: unite recovery.conf and postgresql.conf (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 09/20/2011 09:23 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Simon Riggs<simon@2ndQuadrant.com> writes: >> I sympathise with this view, to an extent. > >> If we do an automatic include of recovery.conf first, then follow by >> reading postgresql,conf then we will preserve the old as well as >> allowing the new. > > I don't buy this argument at all. I don't believe that recovery.conf is > part of anyone's automated processes at all, let alone to an extent that > they won't be able to cope with a change to rationalize the file layout. > And most especially I don't buy that someone who does want to keep using > it couldn't cope with adding an "include" to postgresql.conf manually. As Simon has already appropriately posted.... You would be incorrect. Joshua D. Drake -- Command Prompt, Inc. - http://www.commandprompt.com/ PostgreSQL Support, Training, Professional Services and Development The PostgreSQL Conference - http://www.postgresqlconference.org/ @cmdpromptinc - @postgresconf - 509-416-6579
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: