Re: Why conf.d should be default, and auto.conf and recovery.conf should be in it
От | Peter Eisentraut |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Why conf.d should be default, and auto.conf and recovery.conf should be in it |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 52D702FC.808@gmx.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Why conf.d should be default, and auto.conf and recovery.conf should be in it (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Why conf.d should be default, and auto.conf and
recovery.conf should be in it
Re: Why conf.d should be default, and auto.conf and recovery.conf should be in it |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 1/15/14, 4:35 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes: >> On 1/15/14, 1:53 PM, Josh Berkus wrote: >>> Yes, I'm also arguing that postgresql.auto.conf should go into conf.d. >>> I said I'd bring that up again after ALTER SYSTEM SET was committed, and >>> here it is. > >> Independent of the above, I don't agree with that. postgresql.auto.conf >> is a special thing and should have its own special place. For once >> thing, when putting configuration files in a separate directory >> structure (/etc/ vs /var), then postgresql.auto.conf should stay in the >> data directory. > > It seems like we still aren't all on the same page as to whether the > conf.d directory (and contained files) should be expected to be writable > by the postgres server or not. I think it's hopeless to proceed further > unless there's a strong consensus on that. You can turn this around and ask, why should it be writable? The server has no need to write anything there. In my mind, a conf.d directory is an extension of a single-file configuration, and so it should be handled that way.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: