Re: postgres --help-config
От | Peter Eisentraut |
---|---|
Тема | Re: postgres --help-config |
Дата | |
Msg-id | Pine.LNX.4.44.0310150813590.22628-100000@peter.localdomain обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: postgres --help-config (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: postgres --help-config
Re: postgres --help-config |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane writes: > It'd be better if we could get it right the first time, with the > understanding that the output format is not very negotiable at this > late hour. But as best I can tell, most of the unhappiness is with the > design of the switch set, which is not something I want to defend in > detail. There's a lot there that isn't needed for the RHDB tool as I > understand it, and I think that altering the switches used to get the > output that the tool does need would still be a feasible change from the > tool's point of view. I have some more questions: - When the set of GUC properties (when to set, how to set, etc.) change, what is the upgrade path? Remember that we changethose a lot. - Who is going to maintain the descriptions in this very special "GNU trick" format? I can happily agree if we had a shortdescription that is shown in an overview list, and an long description that is shown when the option is opened up inits own window, but I don't agree with with the current format. At least not in the way it was explained to me, maybeI'm misunderstanding. > I would be in favor of simplifying the supported switch set to the > minimum needed by Red Hat's tool (the equivalent of -G -M if I > understood Fernando correctly), and re-adding complexity in future > when and if it's shown to be needed. But we need to make a decision > about this now. Preferably yesterday. I propose we rip out everything except --help-config -m that shows the information in the "machine-readable" tab separated format without headers. If someone can answer the two questions above. -- Peter Eisentraut peter_e@gmx.net
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: