Lamar Owen <lamar.owen@wgcr.org> writes:
>> I realize that from a packager's point of view, the separate initdb step
>> is not very useful. But it is from my point of view.
> Would you mind elucidating which point of view is yours?
Primarily, one that wants to have multiple postmasters running, of the
same or different versions; including test and temporary installations
that mustn't conflict with the existing primary installation on a machine.
Currently, I don't need to do anything more than set PGDATA or say -D
to initdb in order to set up the data directory wherever I like. I also
don't need to worry about whether I'm selecting the wrong config file.
You're talking about making manual installations significantly more
difficult (and error-prone, I think) in order to simplify automated
installs. Now you've acknowledged that your script can do what
you want it to, and in fact already does. Why is it good to make my
life more difficult to make a script's easier? Cycles are cheap.
I like to think that my time is worth something.
Nor will I buy an argument that only a few developers have need for test
installations. Ordinary users will want to do that anytime they are
doing preliminary tests on a new PG version before migrating their
production database to it. To the extent that you make manual selection
of a nonstandard datadir location more difficult and error-prone, you
are hurting them too.
regards, tom lane
