Re: timezone GUC

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: timezone GUC
Date: 2011-05-23 02:24:06
Message-ID: 19473.1306117446@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 9:54 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> But also, 99.999% of the time
>> it would be completely wasted effort because the DBA wouldn't remove the
>> postgresql.conf setting at all, ever.

> Well, by that argument, we ought not to worry about masterminding what
> happens if the DBA does do such a thing -- just run the whole process
> and damn the torpedoes. If it causes a brief database stall, at least
> they'll get the correct behavior.

Yeah, maybe. But I don't especially want to document "If you remove a
pre-existing setting of TimeZone from postgresql.conf, expect your
database to lock up hard for multiple seconds" ... and I think we
couldn't responsibly avoid mentioning it. At the moment that disclaimer
reads more like "If you remove a pre-existing setting of TimeZone from
postgresql.conf, the database will fall back to a default that might not
be what you were expecting". Is A really better than B?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kevin Grittner 2011-05-23 02:26:34 Re: SSI predicate locking on heap -- tuple or row?
Previous Message Robert Haas 2011-05-23 02:13:50 Re: [BUGS] BUG #6034: pg_upgrade fails when it should not.