Re: postmaster -d option (was Re: [GENERAL] Relation 0 does not exist)

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Patrick Welche <prlw1(at)newn(dot)cam(dot)ac(dot)uk>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: postmaster -d option (was Re: [GENERAL] Relation 0 does not exist)
Date: 2002-09-26 04:00:10
Message-ID: 916.1033012810@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-hackers

Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> ... Now, we just have the GUC value which does
> propogate like the global one did. Does the postmaster still pass -dX
> down to the child like it used to?

Evidently not; else Patrick wouldn't be complaining that it doesn't
work like it used to.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2002-09-26 05:16:12 Re: postmaster -d option (was Re: [GENERAL] Relation 0 does not exist)
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2002-09-26 03:55:56 Re: postmaster -d option (was Re: [GENERAL] Relation 0 does not exist)

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2002-09-26 04:02:29 Re: compiling client utils under win32 - current 7.3devel
Previous Message Tom Lane 2002-09-26 03:58:21 Re: Bug in PL/pgSQL GET DIAGNOSTICS?