On Sun, 22 Sep 2002, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> Thomas implemented an option that he felt was useful, and that doesn't
> break anything inside of the code ... he provided 2 methods of being able
> to move the xlog's to another location (through command line and
> environment variable, both of which are standard methods for doing such in
> server software) ... but, because a small number of ppl "voted" that it
> should go away, it went away ...
The option as he implemented it did make the system more fragile.
You can't back up an environment variable, it's separated from other
configuration information, and it's more easily changed without
realizing it. We should be building systems that are as resilient to
human failure as possible, not opening up more possibilities of failure.
We already have a place for configuration information: the configuration
file. If I created a patch to move a variable out of the configuration
file and make it an environment variable instead, everybody would
(rightly) think I was nuts, and the patch certainly would not be
accepted. So why should the situation be different for new configuration
information?
cjs
--
Curt Sampson <cjs@cynic.net> +81 90 7737 2974 http://www.netbsd.org Don't you know, in this new Dark Age, we're
alllight. --XTC
