From: | Ron Mayer <rm_pg(at)cheapcomplexdevices(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
Cc: | Aidan Van Dyk <aidan(at)highrise(dot)ca>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: Permanent settings |
Date: | 2008-02-21 16:53:19 |
Message-ID: | 47BDAC7F.3040306@cheapcomplexdevices.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Magnus Hagander wrote:
> If they don't have an actual database, it's fairly common to use SQLite or
> similar just to get proper database storage for it.
With all the concern about parsing in this thread, perhaps it's best
if this config-overrides file not be of the same syntax as postgresql.conf
at all.
If the interactive form of these overrides will be
"SET PERMANENTLY work_mem TO 65MB;", why not make the override
config file use the same syntax; since a parser for it'll have
to exist anyway?
Maybe some XML bloat. Or, since you mentioned it, perhaps SQLite
itself, since some people on the thread seem to want sql-like
syntaxes to maintain it?
[Personally, we maintain perl scripts that apply patches to
the default postgresql.conf; and check those in to source
control. I don't think I'd use this override file feature.]
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2008-02-21 17:13:18 | Re: VARATT_EXTERNAL_GET_POINTER is not quite there yet |
Previous Message | Zdenek Kotala | 2008-02-21 16:51:14 | Re: Permanent settings |