From: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Gurjeet Singh <gurjeet(at)singh(dot)im> |
Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, PGSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: /proc/self/oom_adj is deprecated in newer Linux kernels |
Date: | 2014-06-10 17:05:14 |
Message-ID: | 53973ACA.2040801@commandprompt.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 06/10/2014 07:02 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Gurjeet Singh <gurjeet(at)singh(dot)im> writes:
>> Startup scripts are not solely in the domain of packagers. End users
>> can also be expected to develop/edit their own startup scripts.
>
>> Providing it as GUC would have given end users both the peices, but
>> with a compile-time option they have only one half of the solution;
>> except if they go compile their own binaries, which forces them into
>> being packagers.
>
> I don't find that this argument holds any water at all. Anyone who's
> developing their own start script can be expected to manage recompiling
> Postgres.
This is certainly not true in any fashion. Production systems require a
degree of flexibility and configuration that does not require the
maintaining or compiling of source code.
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
--
Command Prompt, Inc. - http://www.commandprompt.com/ 509-416-6579
PostgreSQL Support, Training, Professional Services and Development
High Availability, Oracle Conversion, @cmdpromptinc
"If we send our children to Caesar for their education, we should
not be surprised when they come back as Romans."
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2014-06-10 17:07:23 | Re: NUMA packaging and patch |
Previous Message | David G Johnston | 2014-06-10 16:57:42 | Re: /proc/self/oom_adj is deprecated in newer Linux kernels |