On Tue, 19 Aug 2008 17:11:49 +0200
Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > Hans-Juergen Schoenig wrote:
> >
> >> alternatively we could use some sort of "#include" mechanism to
> >> split "most important" and "not so important".
> >
> > We already have an "include" mechanism.
>
> Using that to include a file that's full of comments anyway (which is
> all that's left in postgresql.conf at this time, I'm sure) just seems.
> Well. Sub-optimal.
Yes but part of this idea is valid. The fact is the majority of the
postgresql.conf parameters don't need to be in there by default. It
just makes the file an intimidating mess for newbies and I am not
talking about just n00bs but also people coming from other environments
such as MSSQL.
I believe we could probably break the conf down to a reasonable 2 dozen
or less parameters. The rest should just be documented in our
documentation and call it good. We even have static URLs for this (I
seem to have dejavu with this as I am pretty sure I have had this
discussion already).
Joshua D> Drake
>
>
> //Magnus
>
--
The PostgreSQL Company since 1997: http://www.commandprompt.com/
PostgreSQL Community Conference: http://www.postgresqlconference.org/
United States PostgreSQL Association: http://www.postgresql.us/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate