Re: Docs for service file

Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > Well, it seems like a nifty features. What do others think? It allows
> > centralized connection parameters.
>
> It seems quite bogus to me: what good is a configuration file on the
> server machine to clients on other machines? (And if it's not on the
> server, one can hardly call it centralized.)

It is centralized in the sense the all clients can read the same local
file. You can change the port number in one location rather than
editing all your code, though we do have environment variables that do
the same thing, though you can't really have the app choosing the
environment variables.

> A proper design for such a feature would pass the service name as part
> of the startup packet and let the postmaster fill in missing fields
> using a server-side config file. Then it would be useful for local
> and remote clients alike.

I don't see how that would work because you can put port numbers and
host names in there.

> Rather than documenting it and thereby locking ourselves into a
> misdesigned "feature", I'd vote for removing code and docs too.
> We can put the concept on the TODO-for-protocol-change list instead.

Again, not sure if that is feasable.

--
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