Re: Explicit configuration file - Mailing list pgsql-hackers
From | mlw |
---|---|
Subject | Re: Explicit configuration file |
Date | |
Msg-id | 3C14B94F.66790A8@mohawksoft.com Whole thread Raw |
In response to | Re: Explicit configuration file (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>) |
Responses |
Re: Explicit configuration file
|
List | pgsql-hackers |
Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > mlw writes: > > > I have added the option of explicitly specifying a postgresql.conf (-C) file on > > the command line. I have also added two config file entries: > > > > pghbaconfig, and pgdatadir. > > > > "pghbaconfig" allows multiple different databases running on the same machine > > to use the same hba file, rather than the hard coded $PGDATA/pg_hba.conf. > > That could be mildly useful, although symlinks make this already possible, > and a bit clearer, IMHO. On systems which support symlinks, yes. Also, a system should be "self documenting" i.e. one should be able to put clues to why certain things were done. Symlinks allow one to do something, yes, but if I leave the company, someone besides me should be able to administrate the system I leave behind. Don't you consider symlinks as a kind of a hack around a basic flaw in the configuration process? Shouldn't the configuration file let you completely specify how your system is configured? > > > "pgdatadir" works with the explicit configuration file so that the data > > directory can be specified in the configuration file, not on the command line > > or environment. > > So you exchange having to specify the data directory with having to > specify the configuration file which specifies the data directory. This > doesn't add any functionality, it only adds one more indirection. Yes and no. There is an underlying methodology to most unix server programs, the configuration information goes in one place, and the data is in another. For people used to PostgreSQL, I don't think they see how alien it is to people that know how to admin UNIX, but not Postgres. Think about named, sendmail, apache, dhcpd, sshd, etc. All these programs have the notion that he configuration is separate from the working data. To see how they are configured, you just go to the "/etc" or "/etc/pgsql" directory and read the configuration file(s). With postgres, you need to know where, and go to the data directory, as ROOT (or the pg user) because you can't enter it otherwise, look at postgresql.conf, do an "ls -l" to see which parts are symlinked and which are not. If you have multiple PostgreSQL installations, you have to go to each directory and repeat the process. (hyperbole, I know) I just posted a reply to a message from Bruce, and in it I theorized that, maybe, even "sysconfigdir" could point to where postgresql.conf would be located by default. I am not suggesting we change the default behavior of PostgreSQL, I am merely suggesting that adding these features may make it more comfortable for the UNIX admin.
pgsql-hackers by date: