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: bruce(at)momjian(dot)us
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, 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 02:22:27
Message-ID: 200808220222.m7M2MRY05093@momjian.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
bruce wrote:
> 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.

Looking further, it seems we still have an inconsistency problem because
pg_settings mentions enum;  should we just change that to 'string'?

-- 
  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. +

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2008-08-22 02:28:14
Subject: Re: Does anything dump per-database config settings? (was Re: ALTER DATABASE vs pg_dump)
Previous: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)

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