On Fri, 14 Nov 2008, Richard Huxton wrote:
> Is it only me that thinks this should be a service on the website too
> (or even first)? Fill in web form, click button, get sample
> postgresql.conf (with comments) back.
Sounds familiar...ah, here it is:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-performance/2007-06/msg00377.php
I'm ignoring the temptation of working on the UI first and instead staying
focused on getting the parameter model slimmed down to a readable set of
code. Ports to other interfaces should follow--I've already got two
people who want to build alternate ones lined up.
To give you an idea how overdiscussed this general topic is, I just sent a
message to Josh suggesting we might put database size into tiers and set
some parameters based on that. Guess what? That was his idea the last
time around, I subconsciously regurgitated it:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-performance/2007-06/msg00602.php
> Add a tick-box asking if we can keep a copy of their answers and you
> might get some useful usage info too.
It's rare I work with a company that wants their internal use of
PostgreSQL to be public knowledge. Putting a collection flag on the page
is just going to spook such commercial users, even if it defaults to off.
The privacy issues are one reason I put the web-based port far down
relative to my priorities; another is that I don't do much web application
development. But if somebody else wants to run with that, fine by me.
--
* Greg Smith gsmith@gregsmith.com http://www.gregsmith.com Baltimore, MD