Excerpts from Bruce Momjian's message of lun oct 03 15:23:47 -0300 2011: > Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > On m?n, 2011-10-03 at 11:27 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > Frankly, I am confused how this breakage has gone unreported for so > > > long. > > > > Well, nobody is required to use pg_ctl, and for the longest time, it was > > pg_ctl that was considered to be broken (for various other reasons) and > > avoided in packaged init scripts. > > Yes, but I am now seeing that pg_ctl is really unfixable. Is the > config-only directory really a valuable feature if pg_ctl does not work? > > If we could document that pg_ctl (and pg_upgrade) doesn't work with > config-only directories, at least we would have a consistent API. The > question is whether the config-only directory is useful with this > restriction.
Evidently people that use config-only dirs don't care all that much about pg_ctl; we'd have a lot of bugs about it otherwise. But I don't think that's the case for pg_upgrade. I think that simply dictating the combination of conf-only dirs and pg_upgrade doesn't work is not going to be a very popular choice, particularly if there's a simple workaround such as adding a symlink. (This makes me wonder, though, we don't we require that said symlink is always in place; maybe have postmaster create it automatically if it's not present?) My guess is that we could fix the simple case (the one that doesn't involve a "-o datadir" option) with the parse-and-report option that has been mentioned, and dictate that the other one doesn't work. That's much less likely to cause a problem in practice. -- Álvaro Herrera <alvhe...@commandprompt.com> The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
