Re: [RFC] Extend namespace of valid guc names

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [RFC] Extend namespace of valid guc names
Date: 2013-02-26 02:13:25
Message-ID: 14919.1361844805@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> I propose loosening those restrictions to
> a) allow repeatedly qualified names like a.b.c

If SET allows it, I guess we can allow it here. But is a grammar change
really all that is needed to make it work from the file?

> b) allow variables to start with a digit from the second level onwards.

That seems like a seriously bad idea. I note that SET does *not* allow
this; furthermore it seems like a considerable weakening of our ability
to detect silly typos in config files. Nor did you offer a use-case
to justify it.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Greg Stark 2013-02-26 03:22:45 Re: auto_explain WAS: RFC: Timing Events
Previous Message Fields, Zachary J. (MU-Student) 2013-02-26 00:23:17 Seg fault when processing large SPI cursor (PG9.13)