| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndquadrant(dot)fr>, Darren Duncan <darren(at)darrenduncan(dot)net>, postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: SQL command to edit postgresql.conf, with comments |
| Date: | 2010-10-14 21:22:47 |
| Message-ID: | 5005.1287091367@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> If the file is completely machine-maintained, including the comments, it
> seems eminently doable. It's only if the file gets mangled by humans
> that there's a problem.
Yeah. We could have comments that were injected by some sort of COMMENT
ON command, stored in the file in some suitably strict format,
and then maintained mechanically. What we don't want to do is promise
that hand editing of the file can coexist with machine updates.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dimitri Fontaine | 2010-10-14 21:45:48 | Re: Extensions, this time with a patch |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2010-10-14 21:06:46 | Re: Path question |