On 03/04/2013 09:34 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Josh Berkus <j...@agliodbs.com> writes: >>> I would like to see the name of the directory be conf.d instead of >>> auto.conf.d though. What's "auto" about it? Using that word just adds >>> a source of confusion. The same problem exists with the file name >>> itself. I was hoping for conf.d/persistent.conf here, and no use of the >>> word "auto" in the code itself. >> my $0.03: I agree with Greg that using the directory is a good idea, and >> that his naming is an improvement. > Neither of those names is consistent with any other PGDATA subdirectory > name we use. It should just be config, or perhaps pg_config, though the > latter risks confusion with the tool of the same name. > > FWIW, I do think that having "auto" or some such in the file name(s) > would be a good idea, to help warn people off editing them manually. Yep; auto in the dir name seems unwise given that we want to allow tools to drop config snippets in there, but auto in the file name would IMO help people realise it shouldn't be edited directly.
-- Craig Ringer http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
