On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 8:55 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Peter Eisentraut <pete...@gmx.net> writes: >> Maybe it would be easier if multiple -k options accumulated. > > After further thought I'm not very enamored of that concept. We've made > considerable compromises to ensure that every postmaster command-line > option corresponds exactly to some GUC parameter; it does not seem to me > that -k is important enough to deserve an exception. > > However, it occurs to me that Murray's original complaint about spaces > in -k pathnames could be dealt with via very narrow changes in > SplitDirectoriesString. That function was modeled on > SplitIdentifierString, with perhaps not enough thought about the > differences between identifiers and pathnames. In particular, I suggest > that there's no need to reject embedded spaces in pathnames, and plenty > of systems on which it's important not to. (Think "Program Files" on > Windows, for instance.) It probably still makes sense to trim leading > and trailing whitespace, but let's allow embedded spaces. > > If we did that, the new code would be incompatible with the old only for > paths including commas, leading double quotes, or leading/trailing > whitespace. I submit that all of those cases are pretty uncommon, > especially compared to embedded space.
That seems reasonable. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
