On 09/02/2016 08:58 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 7:04 AM, Vik Fearing <vik@2ndquadrant.fr> wrote:
>> We have sample configuration files for postgresql.conf and
>> recovery.conf, but we do not have them for contrib modules. This patch
>> attempts to add them.
>>
>> Although the patch puts the sample configuration files in the tree, it
>> doesn't try to install them. That's partly because I think it would
>> need an extension version bump and that doesn't seem worth it.
>
> I don't think that would need an extension version bump; we only need
> that if we're changing which SQL objects get created. So my opinion
> of this effort is:
>
> 1. If we're going to add these files, there's no reason not to install
> them; in fact, not installing them makes the whole thing rather
> pointless, as most people will only see the stuff that gets installed,
> not uninstalled files in the source tree.
Fair enough. The alternative is for packagers to install them, like
they do for recovery.conf.sample. I'll update the patch as soon as we
get consensus that this is wanted.
> 2. But I'm not sure that this will actually be useful to people. It
> seems like it might just be one more thing for patch authors to
> maintain. I think that if somebody wants to set a parameter defined
> for a contrib module, it's easy enough to just add an entry into
> postgresql.conf, or use ALTER SYSTEM .. SET. Going and finding the
> sample file (which only sets the value to the default) and then
> putting that into your postgresql.conf seems like an extra step.
I was imagining just using the "include" directive. I have heard the
desire for annotated sample conf files for the contrib modules twice now
from different people which is why I wrote the patch. If we decide that
the extra documentation is too much of a burden, I can understand that,
also.
--
Vik Fearing +33 6 46 75 15 36
http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support
