X-Original-To: pgsql-docs-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.144]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E83403A4B0B for ; Sat, 13 Nov 2004 20:20:58 +0000 (GMT) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 57115-06 for ; Sat, 13 Nov 2004 20:20:53 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail.gmx.net (pop.gmx.net [213.165.64.20]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 3DCA33A4B07 for ; Sat, 13 Nov 2004 20:20:53 +0000 (GMT) Received: (qmail 7977 invoked by uid 65534); 13 Nov 2004 20:20:52 -0000 Received: from dsl-082-082-224-021.arcor-ip.net (EHLO colt.pezone.net) (82.82.224.21) by mail.gmx.net (mp016) with SMTP; 13 Nov 2004 21:20:52 +0100 X-Authenticated: #495269 From: Peter Eisentraut To: pgsql-docs@postgresql.org Subject: Documentation of server configuration Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 21:20:51 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200411132120.51294.peter_e@gmx.net> X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 tagged_above=0.0 required=5.0 tests= X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200411/19 X-Sequence-Number: 2654 I've just spent a day working through the current set of server configuration parameters, and I think that the documentation at has reached its peak of unusability. I haven't been able to find a single parameter all day except by using a text search over the file. A couple of obvious faults: - There are too many sections. - The sections don't have any obvious order. - The subsections don't have any obvious order. - The lists of individual parameters inside the sections don't have any order. - If a parameter has a list of possible values, the values are not listed in a consistent order. I have made an attempt and reformatted the whole section into one big alphabetical list, and while that has obvious drawbacks, I feel that it's already much more usable than what we have now. Other ideas? -- Peter Eisentraut http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/