Re: [HACKERS] Logging - pg_options format change?

> Tim Holloway <mtsinc@southeast.net> writes:
> > Would it be objectionable if I altered the format of the pg_options
> > file slightly?  I feel the need to handle a somewhat more complex
> > syntax for the logging subsystem.
> 
> While I'm not particularly wedded to the pg_options format, I wonder
> whether it wouldn't be a better idea to create a separate file for
> the logging control data.  If I'm reading your proposal correctly,
> the backend would no longer parse existing pg_options files --- and
> that's certain to make dbadmins unhappy, even if the fix is easy.
> Upgrades are always stressful enough, even without added complications
> like forced changes to config files.
> 
> You could probably tweak the syntax so that an existing pg_options
> file is still valid, but that might be a bit too klugy.  What's
> wrong with having two separate files?  We can assume that this isn't
> a performance-critical path, I think.

With a 7.0 release, I think we can revamp that file without too many
complaints.  pg_options file is fairly new, and it is an administrator's
thing, and only has to be done once.  Seems like a revamp to make it
clear for all users would help.  Having two files would mean explaining
that to people for ever.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://www.op.net/~candle
  maillist@candle.pha.pa.us            |  (610) 853-3000
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026