On 09/20/2011 09:23 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
Simon Riggs<si...@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
I sympathise with this view, to an extent.
If we do an automatic include of recovery.conf first, then follow by
reading postgresql,conf then we will preserve the old as well as
allowing the new.
I don't buy this argument at all. I don't believe that recovery.conf is
part of anyone's automated processes at all, let alone to an extent that
they won't be able to cope with a change to rationalize the file layout.
And most especially I don't buy that someone who does want to keep using
it couldn't cope with adding an "include" to postgresql.conf manually.
As Simon has already appropriately posted.... You would be incorrect.
Joshua D. Drake
--
Command Prompt, Inc. - http://www.commandprompt.com/
PostgreSQL Support, Training, Professional Services and Development
The PostgreSQL Conference - http://www.postgresqlconference.org/
@cmdpromptinc - @postgresconf - 509-416-6579
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
