Re: Why conf.d should be default, and auto.conf and recovery.conf should be in it - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Why conf.d should be default, and auto.conf and recovery.conf should be in it
Date
Msg-id 31712.1389897960@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Why conf.d should be default, and auto.conf and recovery.conf should be in it  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: Why conf.d should be default, and auto.conf and recovery.conf should be in it
List pgsql-hackers
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Another point here is that hard-wiring a config directory location
>> into the executables completely breaks many scenarios for running
>> multiple clusters with the same executables.

> Therefore the proposal is not to hardwire the location in the
> executables.

At least some people seem to be advocating that, even if I misunderstood
whether you were.

I'm fine if the proposal is that postgresql.conf include "include_dir
conf.d" by default (where that's read as relative to postgresql.conf's own
directory).  Even better if it's not terribly difficult for a packager to
change that, because I think some will want to.  We could possibly reduce
the need for packagers to change it if we made it be
"include_dir postgresql.d", because conf.d is a damn generic name for
something that might be in the same /etc directory as configs for other
packages.
        regards, tom lane

PS: off topic, but isn't ParseConfigDirectory leaking the result
of AbsoluteConfigLocation?  In both normal and error paths?



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Heikki Linnakangas
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Negative Transition Aggregate Functions (WIP)
Next
From: Josh Berkus
Date:
Subject: Re: Why conf.d should be default, and auto.conf and recovery.conf should be in it