Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> On 30/11/2018 17:58, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Given that we have a patch for this approach, and no patch has been
>> offered for the /tmp approach, I'm kind of inclined to exercise
>> committer's discretion and proceed with this patch. Will anybody
>> be seriously annoyed if I do?
> I think it's fair to proceed and leave open that someone submits a
> (possibly) better patch for a different approach in the future.
I don't think we'd be able to remove the --socketdir switch once added,
but certainly it doesn't preclude changing the algorithm for default
socket placement.
Pushed with minor code cleanup.
regards, tom lane
