* Alvaro Herrera (alvherre@2ndquadrant.com) wrote:
> Stephen Frost wrote:
> > * Amit Kapila (amit.kapila16@gmail.com) wrote:
> > > What exactly you mean by 'disable postgresql.auto.conf', do you
> > > mean user runs Alter System to remove that entry or manually disable
> > > some particular entry?
> >
> > Last I paid attention to this, there was a clear way to disable the
> > inclusion of postgresql.auto.conf in the postgresql.conf. If that's
> > gone, then there is a serious problem. Administrators who manage their
> > postgresql.conf (eg: through a CM system like puppet or chef..) must
> > have a way to prevent other changes.
>
> Sigh, here we go again. I don't think you can disable postgresql.auto.conf
> in the current code. As I recall, the argument was that it's harder to
> diagnose problems if postgresql.auto.conf takes effect in some system
> but not others.
I don't buy this at all. What's going to be terribly confusing is to
have config changes start happening for users who are managing their
configs through a CM (which most should be..). ALTER SYSTEM is going to
cause more problems than it solves.
> I think if you want puppet or chef etc you'd add postgresql.auto.conf as
> a config file in those systems, so that ALTER SYSTEM is reflected there.
That's really a horrible, horrible answer. The DBA makes some change
and then reloads remotely, only to have puppet or chef come along and
change it back later? Talk about a recipe for disaster.
The only reason I stopped worrying about the foolishness of ALTER SYSTEM
was because it could be disabled. I'm very disappointed to hear that
someone saw fit to remove that. I'll also predict that it'll be going
back in for 9.5.
Thanks,
Stephen