On Tue, 19 Aug 2008, Josh Berkus wrote:
Well, that doesn't help unless we either provide a .conf generation tool
(something I favor) or docs somewhere which explain which are the variables
to be the most concerned with instead of making users read through all 218 of
them.
The design for a pg_generate_conf tool you suggested that's now dumped
into http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/GUCS_Overhaul#pg_generate_conf seemed
the only reasonable solution I've ever heard here. The difference of
opinion between those those want a tiny file and those who want a full one
cannot be reconciled. It's not a logical debate, it's a religious one.
The best you can do is provide something that's switchable to work for the
most popular positions:
* "The file should be minimal"
* "Every parameter should be there with lots of documentation"
* "Just the important parameters should be listed"
Because no one who is firmly in one of those camps will ever move to
another just by arguing here.
I'm going to rewrite that Wiki page to make it more obvious how the
proposed changes actually map to resolving problems in this area. Much of
what's come up in this thread is already addressed there but that's
clearly not obvious to most people.
--
* Greg Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.gregsmith.com Baltimore, MD
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
