Re: guc.c and postgresql.conf.sample constistency check

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Ron Snyder <snyder(at)roguewave(dot)com>
Cc: "'Peter Eisentraut'" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: guc.c and postgresql.conf.sample constistency check
Date: 2002-06-10 14:18:13
Message-ID: 5803.1023718693@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-patches

Ron Snyder <snyder(at)roguewave(dot)com> writes:
>> The catch is that some of these options (lc_*) are supposed
>> to be absent,
>> so it's not as easy as it seems.

> Hmm. Are you saying that lc_* are being pulled out of code, so shouldn't be
> in postgresql.conf.sample, or that they're staying in code but still
> shouldn't be in postgresql.conf.sample?

The lc_ items are actually inserted into postgresql.conf by initdb, so
they don't belong in the sample file. There are a couple other items
that are deliberately undocumented (PreAuthDelay for one). I think your
tool might be useful for catching unintentional omissions, but it'd have
to be tweaked to have a list of the intentional omissions.

> Here's a bit from guc.h:

It's generally unhelpful to quote a comment at its author ;-)

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Katherine Ward 2002-06-10 17:56:32 Superficial changes for Win32
Previous Message Christopher Kings-Lynne 2002-06-10 06:21:56 Re: revised sample SRF C function; proposed SRF API