On 10/03/2011 02:25 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
On 10/03/2011 02:15 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
On 10/03/2011 12:54 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
I was never exactly thrilled with the separate-config-directory design
to start with, so I'm probably not the person to opine on whether we
could get away with removing it.
The horse has well and truly bolted. We'd have a major row if anyone
tried to remove it. Let's not rehash old battles. Our only option is to
make it work as best we can.
I disagree. If people were using it we would have had many more bug
reports about pg_ctl not working.
No, that's an indication people aren't using pg_ctl, not that they
aren't using separate config dirs.
So, you are saying that people who want config-only directories are just
not people who normally use pg_ctl, because if they were, they would
have reported the bug? That seems unlikely. I will admit the Gentoo
case is exactly that.
As Dave has pointed out there are many more people that use it, probably
most notably Debian/Ubuntu users.
So we just document that config-only directories don't work for pg_ctl
and pg_upgrade?
I'd rather not if it can be avoided.
cheers
andrew
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
