-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 18:38:10 -0500
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Aidan Van Dyk <aidan@highrise.ca> writes:
> > * Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> [080220 18:00]:
> >> We need a server-based tool for the manipulating postgresql.conf,
> >> and one which is network-accessable, allows updating individual
> >> settings,
>
> > Do we need to develop our own set of "remote management"
> > tools/systems, or possibly document some best practices using
> > already available "multi- server managment" tools?
>
> Indeed. If Josh's argument were correct, why isn't every other daemon
> on the planet moving away from textual configuration files?
I believe the more correct argument would be to look at how our
competition is doing this, and perhaps learn from them. How does
Oracle, MSSQL, and DB2 handle this? Yes I purposely left out the
dolphin tamers.
Joshua D. Drake
- --
The PostgreSQL Company since 1997: http://www.commandprompt.com/
PostgreSQL Community Conference: http://www.postgresqlconference.org/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL SPI Liaison | SPI Director | PostgreSQL political pundit
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFHvLzsATb/zqfZUUQRAr0WAJ4gkYww0pBzC7ZzwdZZI0E6oLEaqgCfc1gm
MOpFjuKHJ9sX20rJLfrXNOQ=
=hjk0
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
