Re: PGXLOG variable worthwhile? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Rod Taylor
Subject Re: PGXLOG variable worthwhile?
Date
Msg-id 1032302049.41792.5.camel@jester
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: PGXLOG variable worthwhile?  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
Responses Re: PGXLOG variable worthwhile?  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
I forget, is it possible to make a GUC that cannot be changed during
runtime?

If so, then I vote yes, otherwise, there is a problem if someone tries.


On Tue, 2002-09-17 at 17:07, 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?

--  Rod Taylor



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: PGXLOG variable worthwhile?
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: PGXLOG variable worthwhile?