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

Re: Open items

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: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Open items
Date: 2003-10-30 23:16:20
Message-ID: 3902.1067555780@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
>>> We only have a few open items left.  Can we finish them so we can move
>>> toward final release?

The list seems to be nearly down to this:

>>> Rename dump GUC variable to be more generic
>> 
>> Sure, if we can agree on a name.

> We have a few options here.  Currently it is "check_function_bodies". 
> The ideas were validation mode:
>> I think I'd prefer to keep foreign key check disabling separate.  Or at
>> least make it separately selectable.  Maybe validation_mode could have
>> multiple levels ("off", "safe", "risky")?
> and an even more generic "restore_mode" where the restore_mode could
> control even more things, such as doing an ANALYZE before an ALTER TABLE
> ADD CONSTRAINT.

Given the apparent lack of interest in this topic, I propose that we
just leave the variable name as-is.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2003-10-30 23:43:25
Subject: 7.4RC1 planned for Monday
Previous:From: ohpDate: 2003-10-30 22:59:25
Subject: Re: Please help

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