Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.183]) by developer.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 697942E00A1 for ; Mon, 2 Jun 2008 09:36:01 -0300 (ADT) Received: from developer.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 82953-02 for ; Mon, 2 Jun 2008 09:35:47 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from aristoteles.cuci.nl (aristoteles.cuci.nl [212.125.128.18]) by developer.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FDEC2E009E for ; Mon, 2 Jun 2008 09:35:52 -0300 (ADT) Received: by aristoteles.cuci.nl (Postfix, from userid 500) id 9B6EB545E; Mon, 2 Jun 2008 14:35:48 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2008 14:35:48 +0200 From: "Stephen R. van den Berg" To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Overhauling GUCS Message-ID: <20080602123548.GA1590@cuci.nl> References: <48409D1E.3070208@agliodbs.com> <200806010032.53337.peter_e@gmx.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200806/49 X-Sequence-Number: 119162 Greg Smith wrote: >Joshua has been banging a drum for a while now that all this data needs to >get pushing into the database itself. The GUCS data is clearly structured >tables, you'll open up the potential to add a whole new class of >user-friendly applications for making configuration easier to manage. >However, I don't fully agree with taking that idea as far as Joshua has >suggested (only having the config data in the database), because having >everything in a simple text file that can be managed with SCM etc. has >significant value. It's nice to allow admins to be able to make simple >changes with just a file edit. It's nice that you can look at all the >parameters in one place and browse them. However, I do think that the >internal database representation must be capable of holding everything in >the original postgresql.conf file and producing an updated version of the >file, either locally or remotely, as needed. Depending on the complexity you want to have inside the generator, one could imagine a middle ground solution like: include "database-generated.conf" include "local-overrides.conf" Where the "database-generated.conf" does not necessarily needs a lot of comments. >Josh has the actual brains behind such an app all planned out if you look >at his presentations, but without the larger overhaul it's just not >possible to make the implementation elegant. IMHO Greg's response is the most comprehensive and well-thought-through contribution in the whole GUC thread. -- Sincerely, Stephen R. van den Berg.