Horton

Re: unite recovery.conf and postgresql.conf

Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com>

View thread
From: "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>, Euler Taveira de Oliveira <euler@timbira.com>, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2011-09-23T16:20:54Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →

  1. Restructure error handling in reading of postgresql.conf.

On 09/20/2011 09:23 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Simon Riggs<simon@2ndQuadrant.com>  writes:
>> I sympathise with this view, to an extent.
>

>> If we do an automatic include of recovery.conf first, then follow by
>> reading postgresql,conf then we will preserve the old as well as
>> allowing the new.
>
> I don't buy this argument at all.  I don't believe that recovery.conf is
> part of anyone's automated processes at all, let alone to an extent that
> they won't be able to cope with a change to rationalize the file layout.
> And most especially I don't buy that someone who does want to keep using
> it couldn't cope with adding an "include" to postgresql.conf manually.

As Simon has already appropriately posted.... You would be incorrect.

Joshua D. Drake

-- 
Command Prompt, Inc. - http://www.commandprompt.com/
PostgreSQL Support, Training, Professional Services and Development
The PostgreSQL Conference - http://www.postgresqlconference.org/
@cmdpromptinc - @postgresconf - 509-416-6579