| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Joshua Drake <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Hans-Juergen Schoenig <postgres(at)cybertec(dot)at> |
| Subject: | Re: A smaller default postgresql.conf |
| Date: | 2008-08-20 02:40:08 |
| Message-ID: | 18343.1219200008@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net> writes:
> I'd still like to see us adopt the proposal from some time ago where
> we stop commenting out the parameters at all, but short of that,
> hiding options seems about the worst choice we could make.
Well, there seems to be a very substantial body of opinion that says
we *do* need to hide "uninteresting" options. How many are
"interesting" is certainly open to debate, but as far as I can tell
most people think it's a short list, not "all of them".
In short, you're in the minority.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2008-08-20 02:51:29 | Re: Proposed Resource Manager Changes |
| Previous Message | Robert Treat | 2008-08-20 02:33:42 | Re: A smaller default postgresql.conf |