Re: location of the configuration files
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Lamar Owen <lamar.owen@wgcr.org>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>, Oliver Elphick <olly@lfix.co.uk>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2003-02-16T18:15:45Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Lamar Owen <lamar.owen@wgcr.org> writes: > The script's been out there for awhile. It does some things well, and some > things not so well. The config files are still coresident with the database, > and backup is more difficult than it can be. Meeting all these needs (with > configure switches, configuration file directives, etc) would be a good > thing. Sure. I'm happy to change the software in a way that *allows* moving the config files elsewhere. But it's not apparent to me why you insist on forcing people who are perfectly happy with their existing configuration arrangements to change them. I have not seen any reason in this discussion why we can't support both a separate-config-location approach and the traditional single-location one. Please remember that the existing approach has been evolved over quite a few releases. It may not satisfy the dictates of the FHS religion, but it does meet some people's needs perfectly well. Let's look for a solution that permits coexistence, rather than one that forces change on people who don't need or want change. regards, tom lane