Re: unite recovery.conf and postgresql.conf - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Joshua Berkus
Subject Re: unite recovery.conf and postgresql.conf
Date
Msg-id 1890970288.45435.1316893787828.JavaMail.root@mail-1.01.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: unite recovery.conf and postgresql.conf  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: unite recovery.conf and postgresql.conf
Re: unite recovery.conf and postgresql.conf
List pgsql-hackers
> Since we haven't yet come up with a reasonable way of machine-editing
> postgresql.conf, this seems like a fairly serious objection to
> getting
> rid of recovery.conf.  I wonder if there's a way we can work around
> that...

Well, we *did* actually come up with a reasonable way, but it died under an avalanche of bikeshedding and
"we-must-do-everything-the-way-we-always-have-done". I refer, of course, to the "configuration directory" patch, which
wasa fine solution, and would indeed take care of the recovery.conf issues as well had we implemented it.  We can
*still*implement it, for 9.2.
 
> pg_ctl start -c work_mem=8MB -c recovery_target_time='...'

This wouldn't survive a restart, and isn't compatible with init scripts.


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Dimitri Fontaine
Date:
Subject: Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Unlogged vs. In-Memory
Next
From: Marti Raudsepp
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Log crashed backend's query (activity string)