On 19 Sep 2002, Greg Copeland wrote:
> I think Marc made a pretty good case about the use of command line
> arguments but I think I have to vote with Tom. Many of the command line
> arguments you seem to be using do sorta make sense to have for easy
> reference or to help validate your runtime e
Marc G. Fournier writes:
> My point is, the functionality is there, and should be documented properly
> ... encourage ppl to use the GUC setting in postmaster.conf, but just
> because you can't grasp that some of us *like* to use command line args,
> don't remove such functionality ...
Top secre
On Thu, 19 September 2002, "Marc G. Fournier" wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Sep 2002, Robert Treat wrote:
> > Well, as with most (all?) GUC variables, wouldn't you have the option of
> > doing postmaster -o "pgxlog=/dev/null" and have the same
functionality
> > as -X ?
>
> True, but then that negates the w
On Thu, 19 Sep 2002, Robert Treat wrote:
> I don't know if I agree with that. Most servers (apache for instance) have
> configuration variables on where files are going to live, not command line
> options.
Not where it involves *critical* files:
OPTIONS
-R libexecdir
T
I think Marc made a pretty good case about the use of command line
arguments but I think I have to vote with Tom. Many of the command line
arguments you seem to be using do sorta make sense to have for easy
reference or to help validate your runtime environment for each
instance. The other side
On Wed, 2002-09-18 at 22:24, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Sep 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > Sorry, I don't see the logic here. Using postgresql.conf, you set it
> > once and it remains set until you change it again. With -X, you have to
> > use it every time. I think that's where th
On Wed, 18 Sep 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Wed, 18 Sep 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >> Sorry, I don't see the logic here. Using postgresql.conf, you set it
> >> once and it remains set until you change it again. With -X, you have to
> >> use it
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Sep 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > Yea, but you aren't going to be needing to know the xlog directory that
> > way, will you?
>
> Why not? Who are you to tell me how my scripts work, or how they get
> their information? I have a script that runs to tell m
On Wed, 18 Sep 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Yea, but you aren't going to be needing to know the xlog directory that
> way, will you?
Why not? Who are you to tell me how my scripts work, or how they get
their information? I have a script that runs to tell me how much disk
space each instance is
"Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, 18 Sep 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> Sorry, I don't see the logic here. Using postgresql.conf, you set it
>> once and it remains set until you change it again. With -X, you have to
>> use it every time. I think that's where the votes came
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Sep 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > Sorry, I don't see the logic here. Using postgresql.conf, you set it
> > once and it remains set until you change it again. With -X, you have to
> > use it every time. I think that's where the votes came from.
>
> Ah, s
On Wed, 18 Sep 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Sorry, I don't see the logic here. Using postgresql.conf, you set it
> once and it remains set until you change it again. With -X, you have to
> use it every time. I think that's where the votes came from.
Ah, so you are saying that you type out you
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Sep 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > Dave Page wrote:
> > > Which in this case is what puzzles me. We are only talking about a
> > > simple GUC variable after all - I don't know for sure, but I'm guessing
> > > it's not a huge effort to add one?
> >
> > Can we
On Tue, 17 Sep 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Dave Page wrote:
> > Which in this case is what puzzles me. We are only talking about a
> > simple GUC variable after all - I don't know for sure, but I'm guessing
> > it's not a huge effort to add one?
>
> Can we get agreement on that? A GUC for pg_xl
Jan Wieck wrote:
> "Nigel J. Andrews" wrote:
> > However, how is that going to work if tablespaces are introduced in 7.4. Surely
> > the same mechanism for tablespaces would be used for pg_xlog. As the tablespace
> > mechanism hasn't been determined yet, as far as I know, wouldn't it be best to
>
"Nigel J. Andrews" wrote:
> However, how is that going to work if tablespaces are introduced in 7.4. Surely
> the same mechanism for tablespaces would be used for pg_xlog. As the tablespace
> mechanism hasn't been determined yet, as far as I know, wouldn't it be best to
> see what happens there be
Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> Dave Page wrote:
> > Which in this case is what puzzles me. We are only talking about a
> > simple GUC variable after all - I don't know for sure, but I'm guessing
> > it's not a huge effort to add one?
>
> Can we get agreement on that? A GUC for pg_xlog location? Much
17 matches
Mail list logo
