Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

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

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
Subject: Re: Should enum GUCs be listed as such in config.sgml?
Date: 2008-08-22 01:45:57
Message-ID: 200808220145.m7M1jvn06450@momjian.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane wrote:
> Currently, config.sgml still describes the new "enum" GUC variables
> as being of type "string" --- but pg_settings says they are "enum".
> This is not very consistent, but I wonder whether changing the docs
> would be more confusing or less so.  I note that section 18.1 doesn't
> mention the enum alternative either.

I looked into this and I think the documentation is fine.  If enums
didn't require quotes but strings did, we would document them
differently, but the fact is that enums are the same as strings except
enums have a limited number of possible values --- that isn't something
that is usually identified in a variable type definition heading.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Robert TreatDate: 2008-08-22 01:55:18
Subject: Re: Does anything dump per-database config settings? (was Re: ALTER DATABASE vs pg_dump)
Previous:From: Alvaro HerreraDate: 2008-08-22 01:19:58
Subject: Re: Proposal: new border setting in psql

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group