| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Artur Zakirov <a(dot)zakirov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_get_functiondef forgets about most GUC_LIST_INPUT GUCs |
| Date: | 2018-03-16 12:15:54 |
| Message-ID: | 20180316121554.GA2552@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 09:40:18AM +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> 2018-03-16 9:34 GMT+01:00 Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp
>> That's true, but doesn't the additional rule make it more
>> bothersome to maintain the list?
>
> Hard to say. I have not opinion. But just when I see in this context
> variables like listen_address, shared_preload_libraries, then it looks
> messy.
Let's be clear. I have listed all the variables in the patch to gather
more easily opinions, and because it is easier to review the whole stack
this way. I personally think that the only variables where the patch
makes sense are:
- DateStyle
- search_path
- plpgsql.extra_errors
- plpgsql.extra_warnings
- wal_consistency_checking
So I would be incline to drop the rest from the patch. If there are
authors of popular extensions willing to get this support, let's update
the list once they argue about it and only if it makes sense. However,
as far as I can see, there are no real candidates. So let's keep the
list simple.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tomas Vondra | 2018-03-16 12:55:11 | Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Incremental sort |
| Previous Message | Shubham Barai | 2018-03-16 12:10:54 | Re: [HACKERS] GSoC 2017: weekly progress reports (week 6) |