Re: A smaller default postgresql.conf - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: A smaller default postgresql.conf
Date
Msg-id 18343.1219200008@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: A smaller default postgresql.conf  (Robert Treat <xzilla@users.sourceforge.net>)
Responses Re: A smaller default postgresql.conf  (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>)
Re: A smaller default postgresql.conf  ("Jaime Casanova" <jcasanov@systemguards.com.ec>)
List pgsql-hackers
Robert Treat <xzilla@users.sourceforge.net> writes:
> I'd still like to see us adopt the proposal from some time ago where
> we stop commenting out the parameters at all, but short of that,
> hiding options seems about the worst choice we could make.

Well, there seems to be a very substantial body of opinion that says
we *do* need to hide "uninteresting" options.  How many are
"interesting" is certainly open to debate, but as far as I can tell
most people think it's a short list, not "all of them".

In short, you're in the minority.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Treat
Date:
Subject: Re: A smaller default postgresql.conf
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Proposed Resource Manager Changes