| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: ALTER SYSTEM vs symlink |
| Date: | 2015-11-03 03:17:29 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmobDJ3Wvs2_Q9q=GcrcsjV5-QGpWnNUGou-+6MwUpc2bxQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 10:13 PM, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> I think that is the sensible way to deal with this and any other such
> parameters. We already have a way to disallow setting of individual
> parameters (GUC_DISALLOW_IN_AUTO_FILE) via Alter System.
> Currently we disallow to set data_directory via this mechanism and I think
> we can do the same for other parameters if required. Do you think we
> should do some investigation/analysis about un-safe parameters rather
> then doing it in retail fashion?
-1.
This was discussed before, and I feel about it now the same way I felt
about it then: disallowing all GUCs that could potentially cause the
server not to start would make ALTER SYSTEM a whole lot less useful.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2015-11-03 03:33:49 | Re: Freeze avoidance of very large table. |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2015-11-03 03:16:02 | Re: proposal: multiple psql option -c |