From: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Proposal for Re-ordering CONF (was: Re: GUC and postgresql.conf docs) |
Date: | 2003-06-02 18:04:01 |
Message-ID: | 200306021104.01595.josh@agliodbs.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Tom,
> Josh's proposal looks pretty good to me in general, though some of the
> details seem a little odd. "max_files_per_process" doesn't belong under
> lock management (perhaps better to stick it under Memory Usage, possibly
> renaming that category to Resource Consumption) and the Query Tuning/Other
> section seems kinda random. But "miscellaneous" variables are always a
> bear to classify.
OK, sure. I'll track everybody's suggestions an post a revised ordering
tommorrow or wednesday.
One of my objectives was to avoid having a "Miscellaneous" section, as I find
such sections tend to grow with time. I couldn't avoid the Query
Tuning/Other section, though, or for that matter Client Connection/Other; the
options named definitely belong in that category, but don't have an
appropriate sub-category that I can think of.
Anybody see anything else that should be moved?
--
Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Rod Taylor | 2003-06-02 18:12:30 | Re: Problems with renaming a column |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-06-02 18:00:50 | Re: Problems with renaming a column |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2003-06-02 19:03:26 | Re: ALTER SEQUENCE updates |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-06-02 17:36:43 | Re: Proposal for Re-ordering CONF (was: Re: GUC and postgresql.conf docs) |