From: | Kohei KaiGai <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | PgHacker <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Joshua Brindle <jbrindle(at)tresys(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: [v9.2] Add GUC sepgsql.client_label |
Date: | 2012-01-26 19:07:41 |
Message-ID: | CADyhKSWKxXM_kyoMDKeUcFLLXLP4zmpiNR=pWDhah=kaGtySjg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
2012/1/26 Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>:
> I'm wondering if a function would be a better fit than a GUC. I don't
> think you can really restrict the ability to revert a GUC change -
> i.e. if someone does a SET and then a RESET, you pretty much have to
> allow that. I think. But if you expose a function then it can work
> however you like.
>
One benefit to use GUC is that we can utilize existing mechanism to
revert a value set within a transaction block on error.
If we implement same functionality with functions, XactCallback allows
sepgsql to get control on appropriate timing?
> On another note, this is an awfully large patch. Is there a separate
> patch here that just does code rearrangement that should be separated
> out?
>
OK. I moved some routines related to client_label into label.c.
I'll separate this part from the new functionality part.
Thanks,
--
KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Giuseppe Sucameli | 2012-01-26 19:14:22 | Re: Different error messages executing CREATE TABLE or ALTER TABLE to create a column "xmin" |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2012-01-26 19:03:02 | Re: foreign key locks, 2nd attempt |