Re: Should enum GUCs be listed as such in config.sgml?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Should enum GUCs be listed as such in config.sgml?
Date: 2008-11-21 18:03:31
Message-ID: 10075.1227290611@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Last I checked, Magnus had promised to come up with suitable
>> documentation changes for this patch, but then he went off sailing...

> Meh, I seem to have forgotten this one again. Here's a suggestion, seems
> ok, or were you thinking about something more?

Needs a bit of proofreading but this is more or less what I had in
mind.

> + Enum settings are specified the same way as string settings, but they
> + are limited in which strings are accepted. For each setting the available
> + are listed in <literal>pg_settings.enumvals</>.

IIRC the comparisons are case-insensitive; if so the fact should be
mentioned here.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Magnus Hagander 2008-11-21 18:10:15 Re: pg_settings.enumval as array
Previous Message Magnus Hagander 2008-11-21 18:00:25 Re: fmgr.h vs funcapi.h?