From: Michael P. <mic...@gm...> - 2011-07-23 11:57:34
|
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 3:52 PM, Koichi Suzuki <ko...@in...>wrote: > I totally agree with having gtm.conf and gtm_proxy.conf to reduce the > number of runt-time options, especially those passed with -o option from > gtm_ctl. > About the configuration file, perhaps GTM and GTM-proxy could use a configuration file with the same name. I would imagine that if the guc APIs of postgresql are brought in GTM it will be included in gtm/common so as a base it looks more consistent to use the same file name: gtm.conf. > > I need to bring code for GUC from postgres. Could be done as a part of > additional HA feature development. > If you want to include that in the HA effort, it could be nice to make separate patches for the configuration file and GTM-Standby additional features. It will make commit comprehension simpler. -- Michael Paquier http://michael.otacoo.com |