On Tue, 17 Sep 2002, 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?
>
> If I can get a few 'yes' votes I will add it to TODO and do it for 7.4.
Personally, I like the ability to define such at a command line level ...
*especially* as it pertains to pointing to various directories ... I am
against pulling the -X functionality out ... if you don't like it, don't
use it ... add the GUC variable option to the mix, but don't take away
functionality ...
Hell, take a look at what you are saying above: because someone might
forget to set -X, let's get rid of it in favor of a setting in a file that
someone might forget to edit?
Either format has the possibility of an error ... if you are so
incompetent as to make that sort of mistake on a production server, it
won't matter if its a GUC variable, environment variable or commnd line
argument, you will still make that mistake ...
