-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: RIPEMD160
> So your plan is that postgresql.conf will be approximately two thousand > lines long, before the user has ever touched it at all? (Two hundred > or so GUC variables and ten lines of comments for each one) Sure, why not? Clarity should always trump brevity. The only people who gain from a comment-less file are the ones who are already expert in it. Besides, the file is already long enough to require use of an editor's find function. > This seems entirely nuts. Duplicating the whole contents of config.sgml > in another place is pointless as well as maintenance-intensive. And it > *still* wouldn't be enough information for people to know how to twiddle > many of the variables; there are other parts of the SGML docs that > contain relevant info as well. No, not the entire contents - these would be shorter hints. Right now we already partially 'duplicate' due to the mishmash of having some vars explained. Some are explained, some are not, and some have poorly-placed end-of-line comments. A short explanation should be enough to tell people if they need to bother with it or not, or remind them of what it is. For full details, they can go to the provided URL. To add some more fuel to the fire, are those in the no-comments, bare-bone camp going to argue for cleaning up pg_hba.conf as well? > I could see having *one* comment at the top of the file giving pointers > to where to read the documentation. I think this is the one thing everyone agrees on so far. :) - -- Greg Sabino Mullane [EMAIL PROTECTED] End Point Corporation PGP Key: 0x14964AC8 200808201143 http://biglumber.com/x/web?pk=2529DF6AB8F79407E94445B4BC9B906714964AC8 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iEYEAREDAAYFAkisPOcACgkQvJuQZxSWSsjoFACfezftBPQHZ63B0BgTVhDcePZb I0oAoKZhuL+oRJguXQCGsER9P52WmTiJ =aIpg -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
