Re: [HACKERS] PGXLOG variable worthwhile?

On Tue, 17 Sep 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:

> Dave Page wrote:
> > Which in this case is what puzzles me. We are only talking about a
> > simple GUC variable after all - I don't know for sure, but I'm guessing
> > it's not a huge effort to add one?
>
> Can we get agreement on that? A GUC for pg_xlog location? Much cleaner
> than -X, doesn't have the problems of possible accidental use, and does
> allow pg_xlog moving without symlinks, which some people don't like?
>
> If I can get a few 'yes' votes I will add it to TODO and do it for 7.4.

GUC instead of -X or PGXLOG : yes.

However, how is that going to work if tablespaces are introduced in 7.4. Surely
the same mechanism for tablespaces would be used for pg_xlog. As the tablespace
mechanism hasn't been determined yet, as far as I know, wouldn't it be best to
see what happens there before creating the TODO item for the log?

--
Nigel J. Andrews
Director

---
Logictree Systems Limited
Computer Consultants