Re: Configuration include directory

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Greg Jaskiewicz <gj(at)pointblue(dot)com(dot)pl>, Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Configuration include directory
Date: 2011-11-17 16:03:45
Message-ID: 12705.1321545825@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> Excerpts from Tom Lane's message of mi nov 16 22:52:35 -0300 2011:
>> (Do we guard against recursive inclusion via plain old include? If
>> not, maybe this isn't worth worrying about.)

> Yes, we do

> FATAL: could not open configuration file "foo.conf": maximum nesting depth exceeded

Oh, right. So as long as the include-directory code path doesn't
interfere with tracking that nesting depth, I don't think it needs
any extra protection against include-the-same-directory.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2011-11-17 16:21:09 Re: Refactoring on DROP/ALTER SET SCHEMA/ALTER RENAME TO statement
Previous Message Tom Lane 2011-11-17 15:56:36 Re: Removing postgres -f command line option