Re: Proposal to Re-Order Postgresql.Conf, part II

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Jan Wieck
Тема Re: Proposal to Re-Order Postgresql.Conf, part II
Дата
Msg-id 3EE6197C.6010504@Yahoo.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Proposal to Re-Order Postgresql.Conf, part II  (Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Okay, separate documentation might work ;-)


Jan

Josh Berkus wrote:
> Jan,
> 
>> No, not documenting it IS a good move.
> 
> I couldn't disagree more.  Undocumented options?  Who are we, Microsoft?   
> 
>>  If there's a button people will 
>> press it, if there's a switch people will turn it on and if there's a 
>> slot people will stick in whatever they have ... believe it or not, I 
>> have found a Xmas cookie in the floppy drive of a consultant's notebook 
> <snip>
> 
> These kinds of people don't read the documentation in the first place, so 
> we're in no danger from them.
> 
> I can definitely see an argument that the "developer" switches should be 
> documented on a different page of the docs from "Run-Time Configuration".  
> But the idea of having GUCs that aren't documented at all, anywhere, is a 
> very anti-Open Source idea.
> 



-- 
#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me.                                  #
#================================================== JanWieck@Yahoo.com #



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Peter Eisentraut
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Character encoding
Следующее
От: Bruce Momjian
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [GENERAL] Postgresql & AMD x86-64