| From: | Vik Fearing <vik(at)2ndquadrant(dot)fr> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Martín Marqués <martin(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Sample configuration files |
| Date: | 2016-09-29 05:50:04 |
| Message-ID: | 9d065fed-f2d3-572b-4477-f6a17c307faa@2ndquadrant.fr |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 09/29/2016 05:55 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 2:25 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> So, anyone else have an opinion, pro or con?
>
> Going through this thread, I'd vote -1. This is a documentation effort
> mainly, and installing those files has zero effect if they are not
> loaded via include_if_exists or include in postgresql.conf.
Just the other day, I needed this patch yet again but had to go look up
the documentation instead.
I wonder if it would be a good idea to have a postgresql.conf.d
directory that postgresql.conf would include_dir by default. These
could then live in there and all I would have had to do is uncomment the
values I wanted.
This patch doesn't do that, of course, but I could easily write a patch
that does. Would that go over better with the -1ers?
--
Vik Fearing +33 6 46 75 15 36
http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kyotaro HORIGUCHI | 2016-09-29 06:30:39 | Re: asynchronous execution |
| Previous Message | Haribabu Kommi | 2016-09-29 05:45:35 | Re: New SQL counter statistics view (pg_stat_sql) |