| From: | Claudio Natoli <claudio(dot)natoli(at)memetrics(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | 'Andrew Dunstan' <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers-win32(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: registry vs. environment (was re:binary |
| Date: | 2004-02-12 22:53:14 |
| Message-ID: | A02DEC4D1073D611BAE8525405FCCE2B55F2EA@harris.memetrics.local |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers-win32 |
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> I'm not clear *which* settings it is proposed to set in the registry,
> nor how possible it will be to override the settings, and with which
> mechanism.
I pretty much agree with Andrew here. Frankly, I think this whole discussion
"registry vs env" is a bit pointless.
What *exactly* does anyone think will need to be put in the registry?
Surely, our Win32 service wrapper can just allow something like this:
postgres /regserver servicename <command line args go here>
So, if I want to have multiple servers registered, I could do:
postgres /regserver MyPGServer_1 -D c:/data1
postgres /regserver MyPGServer_2 -D c:/data2
and so on.
(FWIW, I'm doing this already)
And of course, you can always run another instance from the command line, or
have a single instance registered that takes all its args from the
environment, or ...
Cheers,
Claudio
---
Certain disclaimers and policies apply to all email sent from Memetrics.
For the full text of these disclaimers and policies see
<a
href="http://www.memetrics.com/emailpolicy.html">http://www.memetrics.com/em
ailpolicy.html</a>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Ronald Kuczek | 2004-02-12 23:18:43 | Re: registry vs. environment (was re:binary |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2004-02-12 20:30:46 | Re: Updated win32 readdir patch |