Re: postmaster, but not pg_ctl -i -i

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Neil Conway
Тема Re: postmaster, but not pg_ctl -i -i
Дата
Msg-id 87znsbrg2t.fsf@mailbox.samurai.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: postmaster, but not pg_ctl -i -i  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Ответы Re: postmaster, but not pg_ctl -i -i  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Список pgsql-general
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes:
> I think the thing you were missing is that for pg_ctl, -o means "here
> are some switches to give to the postmaster", but for the postmaster
> -o means "here are some switches to give to postgres (ie, the backends
> the postmaster spawns)".  So the switches following -o have different
> meanings.

[ tangentially related ... ]

Should we deprecate the switches to the postmaster that are just
alternate ways to specify GUC options (e.g. '-i', '-F', '-B', '-N')?
IMHO, splitting configuration between init scripts and postgresql.conf
only serves to make things more complicated...

Cheers,

Neil

--
Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com> || PGP Key ID: DB3C29FC

В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Neil Conway
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [PERFORM] Upgrade to dual processor machine?
Следующее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: postmaster, but not pg_ctl -i -i