Re: VACUUM fails to parse 0 and 1 as boolean value

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>
Cc: michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz, robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com, masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com, sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: VACUUM fails to parse 0 and 1 as boolean value
Date: 2019-05-21 15:19:59
Message-ID: 20190521151959.dcuxgiyad3khakuj@alap3.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

On 2019-05-21 16:00:25 +0900, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote:
> At Tue, 21 May 2019 14:31:32 +0900, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote in <20190521053132(dot)GG1921(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
> > On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 09:55:59AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> > > Well, it's confusing that we're not consistent about which spellings
> > > are accepted. The GUC system accepts true/false, on/off, and 0/1, so
> > > it seems reasonable to me to standardize on that treatment across the
> > > board. That's not necessarily something we have to do for v12, but
> > > longer-term, consistency is of value.
> >
> > +1.
> >
> > Note: boolean GUCs accept a bit more: yes, no, tr, fa, and their upper
> > case flavors, etc. These are everything parse_bool():bool.c accepts
> > as valid values.
>
> Yeah, I agree for longer-term. The opinion was short-term
> consideration on v12. We would be able to achieve full
> unification on sub-applications in v13 in that direction. (But I
> don't think it's good that apps pass-through options then server
> checkes them..)

To me it is odd to introduce an option, just to revamp the accepted
style of arguments in the next release. I think we ought to just clean
this up now.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Akim Demaille 2019-05-21 15:49:12 Re: Remove useless associativity/precedence from parsers
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2019-05-21 14:55:09 Re: PostgreSQL 12: Feature Highlights