From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-committers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: pgsql/ oc/src/sgml/release.sgml rc/backend/com ... |
Date: | 2002-07-20 19:26:02 |
Message-ID: | 12702.1027193162@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-patches |
Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> writes:
> I do think that it is conceivable that we want to be able to suppress
> the examination of some settings, but I would think that would apply to
> SHOW just the same as SHOW ALL. It seems that anything I can SHOW should
> be there when I do SHOW ALL. Maybe it should be GUC_NO_SHOW and apply to
> both?
Nah, that can be implemented by the show_hook subroutine refusing to
disclose anything. NO_SHOW_ALL is only useful for making SHOW ALL
vary from what SHOW does.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2002-07-20 19:55:39 | pgsql/src/backend/commands trigger.c |
Previous Message | Joe Conway | 2002-07-20 19:16:12 | Re: pgsql/ oc/src/sgml/release.sgml rc/backend/com ... |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2002-07-20 20:27:14 | Re: More heap tuple header fixes |
Previous Message | Joe Conway | 2002-07-20 19:16:12 | Re: pgsql/ oc/src/sgml/release.sgml rc/backend/com ... |