Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> writes:
> While I appreciate that there are bootstrap-type issues with this, I
> really don't like this idea of "later stuff can just override earlier
> stuff".
> include files and conf.d-style options are for breaking the config up,
> not to allow you to override options because a file came later than an
> earlier file. Our particular implementation of config-file reading
> happens to lend itself to later-definition-wins, but that's really
> counter-intuitive for anyone unfamiliar with PG, imv.
I don't follow this argument at all. Do you know any software with text
config files that will act differently from this if the same setting is
listed twice? "Last one wins" is certainly what I'd expect.
regards, tom lane
