Re: location of the configuration files

I don't want to over-engineer this.  Propogating -D into postmaster
makes sense, but grabbing PGDATA doesn't to me.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin Brown wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > I see your point --- pg_ctl does a PGDATA trick when passed -D:
> > 
> >         -D)
> >             shift
> >             # pass environment into new postmaster
> >             PGDATA="$1"
> >             export PGDATA
> > 
> > It should pass -D just like it was given.
> 
> Yes, exactly.
> 
> Now, the more interesting question in my mind is: if pg_ctl isn't
> passed -D but inherits PGDATA, should it nonetheless pass -D
> explicitly to the postmaster?  We can make it do that, and it would
> have the benefit of making transparent what would otherwise be opaque.
> 
> I'm inclined to answer "yes" to that question, but only because
> someone who *really* doesn't want the postmaster to show up with a -D
> argument in "ps" can start the postmaster directly without using
> pg_ctl at all.  Tom made a good argument for sometimes wanting to keep
> the ps output clean, but it's not clear to me that it should
> necessarily apply to pg_ctl.
> 
> But you guys might have a different perspective on that.  :-)
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Kevin Brown					      kevin@sysexperts.com
> 
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
> 

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073