On 07/30/2013 10:10 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> Once we have consensus on these issues, then hopefully we can commit
>> your patch. I don't *think* anyone is arguing with the code at this stage.
>
> There's one other thing, raised by Cédric upthread, about the multiple
> files vs. single file. We decided on a single file because Greg said
> many little files scattered in conf.d/ would be a mess; but if we're
That's not what I get out of the discussion thread. I believed we
settled on One File because that's the patch Amit wrote, and a patch in
the hand is worth two in WIP.
> going to have two new items, one conf.d/ for snippets from external
> tools (living in the config directory) and one for ALTER SYSTEM (living
> in PGDATA), then the idea of going back to one setting per file is
> perhaps not bad.
On 07/30/2013 10:28 AM, Greg Stark wrote:> On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 6:10
PM, Alvaro Herrera
> Well more to the point, if we conf.d for sysadmins to drop in extra
> snippets in a different place then we could drop conf.d in PGDATA
> since there's no need for it any more and just have auto.conf in
> PGDATA directly.
That assumes that the only reason we have for a conf.d is to support
auto.conf, which I don't agree with; I personally have a need for conf.d
which has nothing to do with auto.conf.
Also, see gsmith's point about forcing auto.conf to be in PGDATA as not
satisfactory for Debian users (and others).
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com
