Andreas Kling wrote:
> Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> Anybody know *why* Gentoo does such a thing? Having shared buffers at
>> the very lowest possible boundary just seems counterproductive. Plus,
>> the normal way to set these things would be in postgresql.conf, why
>> override them on the commandline?
>>
>> It's not the first time I've seen people complain about this, it'd be
>> good to know why.
> It's been brought up on the Gentoo bugzilla
> (http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=206725), so hopefully something
> will come of that.
That's good to see. I fully agree with the guy who wrote it and his
comment "this was a huge surprise" :-)
>> Those are not comments on the actual patch, of course. For that one,
>> it looks to me like it's the wrong fix. I don't think we should be
>> adding to shared buffers like that - if somebody asked for a specific
>> value they should get that. But in that case the error message needs
>> to be changed, since it's misleading.
> If we follow that logic, there shouldn't be an error message at all. ;-)
I think you misunderstand me. I don't mean he should actually get the
number of buffers he asks for if it's invalid, of course. But that we
shouldn't silently adjust the given parameter - we should tell the user
that the given parameter are wrong, and how.
//Magnus
