\Robert Haas wrote: > On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 1:39 PM, Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote: > > Robert Haas wrote: > >> On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 10:33 PM, Alvaro Herrera > >> <alvhe...@commandprompt.com> wrote: > >> > Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of vie jun 24 22:22:55 -0400 2011: > >> >> On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 7:47 PM, Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote: > >> > > >> >> > You want the environment variable support removed? > >> >> > >> >> I don't. ?It's production usefulness is questionable, but it's quite > >> >> handy for testing IMO. > >> > > >> > If that's what you want, I think being able to read a file (whose > >> > filename you pass with a switch to pg_upgrade) with a bunch of settings > >> > is even more convenient. ?Heck, maybe it's more convenient for the user > >> > too. > >> > >> If someone wants to do the work, I'm all in favor. ?But I don't feel > >> that we should insist that Bruce do it. > > > > Is there agreement to remove all pg_upgrade-specific environment > > variables? > > I'm not in favor of that unless we have a workable replacement for them.
OK, fair enough. Should I apply my ports patch to Postgres 9.2? -- 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