| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Thomas Hallgren <thhal(at)mailblocks(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Advice regarding configuration parameters |
| Date: | 2004-02-08 04:59:25 |
| Message-ID: | 27973.1076216365@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> I have been thinking for some time about a generic mechanism to
>> configure procedural languages. It could be a text array in
>> pg_language that you could fill at will.
> One big question is whether the per-language variables are per-server or
> per-database. The might determine if you want them in the database or
> in a configuration file.
Of course, there's already a solution for that in GUC.
Given all the work Peter put into GUC (for very good reasons), I was a
tad astonished to read him proposing to develop a non-GUC mechanism
for configuring PLs.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Christopher Browne | 2004-02-08 05:05:52 | Re: PITR Dead horse? |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2004-02-08 03:56:56 | Re: Advice regarding configuration parameters |