From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, MauMau <maumau307(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [bug fix] pg_ctl always uses the same event source |
Date: | 2014-01-22 14:37:59 |
Message-ID: | CAA4eK1KniPGphd9JSJfE71uprWjpNs=xDV5eWOTsW=kGU+DF6g@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 6:54 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 11:20 PM, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 9:19 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>>> Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>>>> On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 6:57 PM, MauMau <maumau307(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>>>> To follow this, we have the line as:
>>>>>
>>>>> #event_source = 'PostgreSQL 9.4'
>>>>>
>>>>> But this requires us to change this line for each major release. That's a
>>>>> maintenance headache.
>>>
>>>> What I had in mind was to change it during initdb, we are already doing it
>>>> for some other parameter (unix_socket_directories),
>>>
>>> What happens when somebody copies their postgresql.conf from an older
>>> version? That's hardly uncommon, even though it might be considered bad
>>> practice. I don't think it's a good idea to try to insert a version
>>> identifier this way.
>>>
>>> But ... what's the point of including the PG version in this string
>>> anyhow? If you're trying to make the string unique across different
>>> installations on the same machine, it's surely insufficient, and if
>>> that's not the point then what is?
>>
>> Well, certainly it cannot handle all different scenario's (particularly
>> same version installations), but the original report for this case was
>> for different versions of server. I think chances of having different
>> versions of server are much more, which will be handled by this
>> case.
>
> I wonder if the port number wouldn't be a better choice. And that
> could even be done without adding a parameter.
We need this for register of event source which might be done before
start of server.
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Fujii Masao | 2014-01-22 14:48:26 | The problems of PQhost() |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2014-01-22 14:32:09 | Re: Dynamic Shared Memory stuff |