Tom Lane wrote:
> I am happy to design an arrangement that allows you not to depend on
> PGDATA if you don't want to. But I don't see why you need to break
> my configuration procedures in order to fix yours. As I outlined last
> night, it's possible to do what you want without breaking backwards
> compatibility for those that like PGDATA.
Yes, I agree. I hadn't really thought of all the possible benefits of
PGDATA. Sorry. :-(
Would you agree that it would be a beneficial change to have pg_ctl
pass explicit arguments to postmaster? It would go a long way towards
eliminating most of the situations I described.
A warning in the documentation about the consequences of using PGDATA
might not be a bad idea, either...
--
Kevin Brown kevin@sysexperts.com