On 1/15/14, 11:23 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Peter Eisentraut (peter_e@gmx.net) wrote:
>> In my mind, a conf.d directory is an extension of a single-file
>> configuration, and so it should be handled that way.
>
> I'm apparently out on some funny limb with this thought, but I'll throw
> it out there anyway- in my head, the 'postgresql.auto.conf' thing that
> essentially ends up included as part of 'postgresql.conf' should be
> handled the same way a single 'postgresql.conf' or 'conf.d' directory
> is.
Then one might as well argue that the pg_db_role_setting table be
relocated to /etc. It's the same facility, only on a slightly different
level. The fact that postgresql.auto.conf looks the same as a
plain-text configuration file is an implementation detail. We could
have chosen some binary format instead.
