Re: WAL file location
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Andrew Sullivan <andrew@libertyrms.info>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers List <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2002-07-31T14:23:07Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Andrew Sullivan <andrew@libertyrms.info> writes: > a. The system uses no environment variables at all; some other > method is used to determine where the config file is (maybe compiled > into the code); > If I understand it, nobody is really arguing for (a). I am. I see absolutely no advantage in depending on environment variables rather than a config file. Here's another point beyond the ones I've made already: config files are self-documenting if we set them up in the style used by postgresql.conf (ie, comments showing all the allowed settings) --- self-documenting with respect to both what you might do, and what you actually have done in the running system. Environment variables are not; do you know exactly which strings in your environment affect Postgres, or what other settings you might have made but didn't? Where would you go to find out? (This is partly a failure of documentation, no doubt, but the point about a config file is that it offers an extremely obvious place to find out.) Also, how could you find out the actual configuration of a running server ... especially if you are admining it remotely? We have SHOW for GUC variables, and nothing at all for environment variables. Bottom line: we have an extremely nice configuration engine in place already. I really fail to understand why we want to ignore it and emulate inferior pre-GUC approaches. regards, tom lane