Re: PGXLOG variable worthwhile?

Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> > > It seems all of this discussion misses the point. Either it has a large
> > > amount of impact and the idea gets rejected because of implementation
> > > issues, or it has little impact but it's nothing the core group wants to
> > > implement. If the problem is finding someone to implement it, it sounds
> > > like Justin has found such a person, so are we going to stand in his way
> > > while we wax poetic about OS religion and corporate philosophies or can
> > > he start submitting patches?
> >
> > Actually, the work is minimal. Look at the commit I used to remove
> > PGXLOG, trim that to remove the changes to make the path name dynamic in
> > size (added too much complexity for little benefit) and hang the path
> > coding off a GUC variable rather than an environment variable.
>
> I personally don't see the problem with a GUC variable...that seems like the
> perfect solution to me...

Well, let's see if we ever run on native NT4.X and we can decide then.
Actually, don't our Cygnus folks have a problem with moving pg_xlog
already?

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073