Server tries to read a different config file than it is supposed to - Mailing list pgsql-general

From twoflower
Subject Server tries to read a different config file than it is supposed to
Date
Msg-id 1432380189914-5850752.post@n5.nabble.com
Whole thread Raw
Responses Re: Server tries to read a different config file than it is supposed to  (rob stone <floriparob@gmail.com>)
Re: Server tries to read a different config file than it is supposed to  (Adrian Klaver <adrian.klaver@aklaver.com>)
Re: Server tries to read a different config file than it is supposed to  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-general

I thought I understood how specifying a config file path for the server works, but that's apparently not the case.

The cluster data is at /storage/postgresql/9.4/data.

The config files are at /etc/postgresql/9.4/main (this is the default location on Ubuntu).

This is how the beginning of /etc/postgresql/9.4/main/postgresql.conf looks like: data_directory = '/storage/postgresql/9.4/data'
hba_file = '/etc/postgresql/9.4/main/pg_hba.conf'
ident_file = '/etc/postgresql/9.4/main/pg_ident.conf'

So I wrote a few scripts to make my life easier, e.g. pg94start.sh:su postgres -c "/usr/lib/postgresql/9.4/bin/pg_ctl -D /storage/postgresql/9.4/data -o '-c config_file=/etc/postgresql/9.4/main/postgresql.conf'"

But running this script did not work, the server would not start. So I checked the log file and there was:FATAL: could not open file "/storage/postgresql/9.4/data/postgresql.conf": Permission denied

After fixing the ownership of this file, it worked.

What's the reason the server was trying to access that file? Why does not the override given by the config_file parameter work? Thank you.


View this message in context: Server tries to read a different config file than it is supposed to
Sent from the PostgreSQL - general mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Francisco Olarte
Date:
Subject: Re: FW: Constraint exclusion in partitions
Next
From: Thomas Kellerer
Date:
Subject: Re: Allowing postgresql to accept 0xff syntax for data types that it makes sense for?