| From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Marko Kreen <marko(at)l-t(dot)ee>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Glitch in handling of postmaster -o options |
| Date: | 2001-09-30 18:13:34 |
| Message-ID: | 200109301813.f8UIDYG25572@candle.pha.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> Marko Kreen <marko(at)l-t(dot)ee> writes:
> >> I wonder whether we should retire -o.
>
> > How about putting -o stuff after -p? That way only postmaster
> > code can set PGC_POSTMASTER options for a backend, no way for
> > user to mess up. ATM this would break -o -F tho'.
Not sure what you are suggesting here. Should we keep -o but say all
options after -o are passed to postgres backends:
postmaster -a -b -c -o -f -g -h
In this case, -abc goes to postmaster and -fgh goes to postgres.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2001-09-30 18:26:36 | Re: path for contrib/intarray (current CVS) |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2001-09-30 17:35:06 | Re: Pre-forking backend |