On Tue, 2009-10-27 at 13:21 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Greg Smith <gsm...@gregsmith.com> writes: > > ... One file per GUC is certainly never going to fly though, it's > > been hard enough getting people to accept going from one file to more than > > one. > > One thing that concerns me a bit about the lack of consensus on that > is what will happen if different config-adjustment tools adopt different > philosophies. If Dimitri writes a tool that drops settings into per-GUC > files, and you write one that puts them all in persistent.conf, and > somebody tries to use both those tools, no good will come of it. > > If we forgot about the config-dir idea and just had one file that was > meant to be hacked by automated tools, the problem would go away. > However I suspect that that proposal won't fly, so we ought to think > about providing some guidance to tools writers about what to do. > Is there any consensus on how multiple config files actually get used > over in the Apache/etc world?
Apache has an include functionality that supports wildcards etc... so I can do: include "conf/*.conf" And it just parses them. Joshua D. Drake > > regards, tom lane > -- -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
