|From:||Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>|
|To:||Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>|
|Cc:||Nitin Jadhav <nitinjadhavpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org|
|Subject:||Re: Fix GUC_NO_SHOW_ALL test scenario in 003_check_guc.pl|
|Views:||Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email|
Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com> writes:
> SELECT pg_show_all_settings() ought to keep working when called with no
> parameter. Tom gave me a hint how to do that for system catalogs here:
> In this case, it might be cleaner to add a second entry to pg_proc.dat
> than to add "CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION" to system_functions.sql (I
> tried but couldn't get that to work just now).
I kind of think this is a lot of unnecessary work. The case that is
problematic is a GUC that's marked GUC_NO_SHOW_ALL but not marked
GUC_NOT_IN_SAMPLE. There aren't any of those, and I don't think there
are likely to be any in future, because it doesn't make a lot of sense.
Why don't we just make a policy against doing that, and enforce it
with an assertion somewhere in GUC initialization?
regards, tom lane
|Next Message||Tomas Vondra||2023-01-29 18:08:36||Re: lockup in parallel hash join on dikkop (freebsd 14.0-current)|
|Previous Message||Andres Freund||2023-01-29 17:53:36||Re: lockup in parallel hash join on dikkop (freebsd 14.0-current)|