| From: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Greg Smith <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com>, Andreas Pflug <pgadmin(at)pse-consulting(dot)de>, "Decibel!" <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Overhauling GUCS |
| Date: | 2008-06-06 15:36:47 |
| Message-ID: | 4849598F.9080800@commandprompt.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
>> - If we know better values, why don't we set them by default?
>
> The problem is: better for what? In particular, I'm uncomfortable with
> any changes in the direction of trying to make Postgres take over the
> entire machine by default. I'd want some fairly explicit permission
> from the user for that ...
That is where some 80% solution sample config files come in.
Joshua D. Drake
>
> regards, tom lane
>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2008-06-06 15:50:54 | Re: Overhauling GUCS |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2008-06-06 15:16:50 | Re: Overhauling GUCS |