| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndquadrant(dot)fr>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, 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 17:10:28 |
| Message-ID: | AANLkTinb3yngKfpJDS54xb05gcC8SfSZ4_jHnfZseKC_@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 12:40 PM, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> wrote:
>
>> Sure. I just lose comments. I'll live with that.
>
> Actually, as part of this scheme, it would be nice if pg_settings had a
> "comment" column, which would be optionally set with SET PERMANENT. Not
> required, but nice to have.
>
> If we had that, I suspect that a lot fewer people would want a hand-edited
> file.
I have to say that I'm woefully unimpressed by the idea of trying to
do anything with comments other than ignore them, even something this
simple. There's no obvious way to know which comments go with which
settings. You can make up a rule, such as "on the same line", but
it's not necessarily going to be what people want. I think it's
better to sidestep the issue entirely.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2010-10-14 17:10:57 | Re: [GENERAL] pg_filedump binary for CentOS |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2010-10-14 17:08:36 | Re: A small update for postgresql.conf.sample |