Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > 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.
Well, we are unlikely to backpatch that parse-and-report option so it would be +2 years before it could be expected to work for even single-major-version upgrades. That just seems unworkable. Yeah. :-( Yes, auto-creation of symlinks would be useful, but at that point pg_ctl and pg_upgrade would have to use the real data directory, so I again wonder what the config-only directory is getting us. Why were people not using pg_ctl? Because of the limitations which were fixed in PG 9.1? As Dave already said, windows already has to use pg_ctl. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
