Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> On 2013-12-06 11:02:48 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I think the special-purpose command line switches you mention can be
>> passed through PGOPTIONS, rather than inventing a new parameter -- do you
>> have an objection to that?
> I am not sure if they currently will get recognized early enough and
> whether permission checking will interferes, but if so, that's probably
> fixable.
Shouldn't be a problem --- the single-user mode will just concatenate
the options parameter onto the command line it builds.
> There's the question what we're going to end up doing with the current
> single user mode? There's some somewhat ugly code around for it...
Nothing, in the short term. In a release or two we can get rid of it,
probably, but I'd hesitate to provide no overlap at all of these
usage modes.
regards, tom lane