Re: Re: Proposal for Allow postgresql.conf values to be changed via SQL [review]

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Re: Proposal for Allow postgresql.conf values to be changed via SQL [review]
Date: 2013-03-04 01:34:12
Message-ID: 20760.1362360852@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> writes:
>> I would like to see the name of the directory be conf.d instead of
>> auto.conf.d though. What's "auto" about it? Using that word just adds
>> a source of confusion. The same problem exists with the file name
>> itself. I was hoping for conf.d/persistent.conf here, and no use of the
>> word "auto" in the code itself.

> my $0.03: I agree with Greg that using the directory is a good idea, and
> that his naming is an improvement.

Neither of those names is consistent with any other PGDATA subdirectory
name we use. It should just be config, or perhaps pg_config, though the
latter risks confusion with the tool of the same name.

FWIW, I do think that having "auto" or some such in the file name(s)
would be a good idea, to help warn people off editing them manually.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Greg Smith 2013-03-04 01:55:34 Re: Re: Proposal for Allow postgresql.conf values to be changed via SQL [review]
Previous Message Josh Berkus 2013-03-04 01:25:29 Re: Re: Proposal for Allow postgresql.conf values to be changed via SQL [review]