On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 1:15 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Sawada Masahiko <sawada.m...@gmail.com> writes: >> On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 12:37 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >>> Yes. The entire reason that postgresql.auto.conf is separate is that >>> we despaired of reading and rewriting postgresql.conf automatically >>> without making a hash of material in the comments. Calling the logic >>> a "merge tool" does not make that problem go away. > >> The merge tool do not only to merge the all parameters in two >> configuration into one file but also to remove duplicate parameters. >> That is, the configuration files will be one file in logically. > > I'll just say one more time that if we thought this could work, we'd not > have arrived at the separate-files design to begin with. You can work > on it if you like, but I will bet a good deal that you will not end up > with something that gets accepted. >
Yep, I don't intend to propose again that. Because I thought that the maintaining of configuration file will be complicated, so I just thought we can add supporting tool. Regards, ------- Sawada Masahiko -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
