Re: Call for objections: deprecate postmaster -o switch?

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Bruce Momjian
Тема Re: Call for objections: deprecate postmaster -o switch?
Дата
Msg-id 200111242227.fAOMRrj13262@candle.pha.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Call for objections: deprecate postmaster -o switch?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Список pgsql-hackers
> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> > OK, but when we recommend, we had better tell them to start using GUC
> > and not long command-line options _unless_ long options are supported on
> > their platform.  Without that, there will be confusion.
> 
> This is entirely irrelevant, because the postmaster and backend don't
> have any long options (except GUC variables which work anyway).

Oh, I see.  We don't use long options for postmaster/postgres, just the
-c option to set a GUC value.  Got it.

--  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610)
853-3000+  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill,
Pennsylvania19026
 


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Call for objections: deprecate postmaster -o switch?
Следующее
От: Bruce Momjian
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Call for objections: deprecate postmaster -o switch?