| From: | Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Darren Duncan <darren(at)darrenduncan(dot)net>, postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: SQL command to edit postgresql.conf, with comments |
| Date: | 2010-10-14 14:47:41 |
| Message-ID: | m2tykorfua.fsf@2ndQuadrant.fr |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> Um, other than "show work_mem" or "select from pg_settings"?
>
> The fact is that you cannot know the active value anyway without
> checking, because what you did with SET PERMANENT might be overridden
> in various session-local ways. The proposal for hand-edited versus
> machine-edited files just adds one more layer of possible overrides
> to the existing half-dozen layers, all of which are widely considered
> features not bugs. So I see no merit in your argument.
I understand that. I just think there are already too many sources for
GUCs and would welcome that there's a single possible source file with a
complete remote editing feature.
--
Dimitri Fontaine
http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dimitri Fontaine | 2010-10-14 14:49:19 | Re: SQL command to edit postgresql.conf, with comments |
| Previous Message | Alastair Turner | 2010-10-14 14:39:02 | Re: First patch proposal |