| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Amir Rohan <amir(dot)rohan(at)zoho(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hacker mailing list <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Proposal: pg_confcheck - syntactic & semantic validation of postgresql configuration files |
| Date: | 2015-10-14 17:45:53 |
| Message-ID: | 20151014174553.GD4405@alvherre.pgsql |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Amir Rohan wrote:
> it does fail the "dependent options" test:
> $ postgres -C "archive_mode"
> on
> $ postgres -C wal_level
> minimal
>
> no errors, great, let's try it:
> $ pg_ctl restart
>
> FATAL: WAL archival cannot be enabled when wal_level is "minimal"
This complaint could be fixed we had a --check-config that runs the
check hook for every variable, I think. I think that closes all the
syntax checks you want; then your tool only needs to worry about
semantic checks, and can obtain the values by repeated application of -C
<param> (or, more conveniently, have a new -C mode that takes no args
and prints the names and values for all parameters).
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2015-10-14 17:50:27 | Re: Proposal: pg_confcheck - syntactic & semantic validation of postgresql configuration files |
| Previous Message | Christopher Browne | 2015-10-14 17:40:42 | Re: Can extension build own SGML document? |