From: | mlw <pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Kevin Brown <kevin(at)sysexperts(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Subject: | Re: location of the configuration files |
Date: | 2003-02-13 05:31:01 |
Message-ID: | 3E4B2D95.8010304@mohawksoft.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
>Kevin Brown <kevin(at)sysexperts(dot)com> writes:
>
>
>>I assume $PGDATA was around long before GUC?
>>
>>
>
>Yes, it was. But I have not yet seen an argument here that justifies
>why $SOMECONFIGDIRECTORY/postgresql.conf is better than
>$PGDATA/postgresql.conf. The latter keeps all the related files
>together. The former seems only to introduce unnecessary complexity.
>You can only justify it as simpler if you propose hardwiring a value for
>$SOMECONFIGDIRECTORY ... which is a proposal that will not fly with any
>of the core developers, because we all run multiple versions of Postgres
>on our machines so that we can deal with back-version bug reports,
>test installations, etc. It is unlikely to fly with any of the RPM
>packagers either, due to the wildly varying ideas out there about the
>One True Place where applications should put their config files.
>
>(This point was pretty much why mlw's previous proposal was rejected,
>IIRC.)
>
>
I wasn't talking about a "default directory" I was talking about
configuring a database in a configuration file.
While I accept that the PostgreSQL group can not be playing catch-up
with other databases, this does not preclude the notion accepting common
practices and adopting them.
Understand, I really like PostgreSQL. I like it better than Oracle, and
it is my DB of choice. That being said, I see what other DBs do right.
Putting the configuration in the data directory is "wrong," no other
database or service under UNIX or Windows does this, Period.
Does the PostgreSQL team know better than the rest of the world?
The idea that a, more or less, arbitrary data location determines the
database configuration is wrong. It should be obvious to any
administrator that a configuration file location which controls the
server is the "right" way to do it. Regardless of where ever you choose
to put the default configuration file, it is EASIER to configure a
database by using a file in a standard configuration directory (/etc,
/usr/etc, /usr/local/etc, /usr/local/pgsql/conf or what ever). The data
directory should not contain configuration data as it is typically
dependent on where the admin chooses to mount storage.
I am astounded that this point of view is missed by the core group.
Mark.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2003-02-13 05:32:58 | Re: domain check constraint syntax problem for 7.4 |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2003-02-13 05:30:07 | Re: [HACKERS] More benchmarking of wal_buffers |