| From: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Alex Hunsaker" <badalex(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Hiding undocumented enum values? |
| Date: | 2008-05-27 18:05:45 |
| Message-ID: | 20080527200545.33460bcb@mha-laptop.hagander.net |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Alex Hunsaker wrote:
> On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 10:20 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> > I am wondering if it's a good idea to hide the redundant entries
> > to reduce clutter in the pg_settings display. (We could do this
> > by adding a "hidden" boolean to struct config_enum_entry.)
> > Thoughts?
>
> +1
>
> > regards, tom lane
>
> Maybe something like the attached patch?
Oops, missed that there was a patch posted already. Looks like the way
to do it (except I'd move the comment :-P) if that's the way we go.
> I looked into just making it a string so we could use parse_bool...
> because backslash_quote seems to be the exception not the rule. But I
> decided having a hidden flag seems more useful anyway...
It used to be a string. We don't want that, because then we can't tell
the client which possible values are available. That's the whole reason
for the creation of the enum type gucs...
//Magnus
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Magnus Hagander | 2008-05-27 18:19:20 | Re: Remove redundant extra_desc info for enum GUC variables? |
| Previous Message | Magnus Hagander | 2008-05-27 18:03:59 | Re: Hiding undocumented enum values? |