From: | Richard Yen <richyen3(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL WWW <pgsql-www(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Enable development via Docker |
Date: | 2020-02-26 01:49:59 |
Message-ID: | CAKH4vDj12p9-Q6tB6UDF_AEwFcD80YZUKkRftz6Yn13a8DfeJQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-www |
On Sun, Feb 23, 2020 at 4:02 PM Richard Yen <richyen3(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Feb 23, 2020 at 6:27 AM Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
> wrote:
>
>>
>> Your second file is named "load varnish", but does not contain
>> anything about varnish at all -- did you forget something there?
>>
>
> Varnish is loaded in the *.sql files in the sql/ folder. I included that
> as a part of the postgres container's initdb mount. Granted, there's more
> logic to be handled because there's the dev version of the varnish plpgsql
> functions that need to be loaded v. the prod version. I'll work on that
> when I get a chance--look for a more comprehensive patch to come through
> this thread.
>
Just to follow up on this -- in sql/ there's a varnish.sql and a
varnish_local.sql. Is there a reason to use varnish_local.sql instead of
varnish.sql while developing? It's just a bunch of no-op functions, but I
can't seem to see a clear advantage of using varnish_local.sql instead of
varnish.sql -- it's not like it would hamper development or otherwise make
it difficult, would it? Can we do away with varnish_local.sql?
Cheers,
--Richard
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum | 2020-02-26 02:26:07 | Re: Non-personal blogs on Planet |
Previous Message | Richard Yen | 2020-02-26 01:37:20 | Dark mode theme |