| From: | Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
|---|---|
| To: | Álvaro Hernández Tortosa <aht(at)nosys(dot)es> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndquadrant(dot)fr>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Greg Smith <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: RFC: programmable file format for postgresql.conf |
| Date: | 2013-12-09 17:26:08 |
| Message-ID: | CAM-w4HNt_4c0SJPDTMhssG-7KOM5T=oo5h8ny9nsr=m2aYE+5w@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 3:28 AM, Álvaro Hernández Tortosa <aht(at)nosys(dot)es> wrote:
>>> "Right now, writing such a tool in a generic way gets so bogged down
>>> just in parsing/manipulating the postgresql.conf file that it's hard to
>>> focus on actually doing the tuning part."
>>
>> That was in 2008. I don't think that stance is accurate anymore.
>
> Just for me to learn about this: why is it not accurate anymore?
This topic has been under active discussion for the last five years. I
strongly recommend going back and skimming over the past discussions
before trying to pick it up again. In particular go look up the
discussion of SET PERSISTENT
Since we have include files now you can just generate an
auto-tune.conf and not try to parse or write the main config file.
The reason previous efforts got bogged down in parsing/manipulating
the postgresql.conf file was purely because they were trying to allow
you to edit the file by hand and mix that with auto generated config.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeff Davis | 2013-12-09 17:45:51 | Re: Extension Templates S03E11 |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2013-12-09 17:17:41 | Re: Extension Templates S03E11 |