Re: [PATCH] SET search_path += octopus

From: Abhijit Menon-Sen <ams(at)toroid(dot)org>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] SET search_path += octopus
Date: 2020-10-21 04:35:40
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

At 2020-10-20 10:53:04 -0700, andres(at)anarazel(dot)de wrote:
> > postgres=# ALTER SYSTEM SET max_worker_processes += 4;
> Much less clear that this is a good idea...

I agree it's less clear. I still think it might be useful in some cases
(such as the example with max_worker_processes quoted above), but it's
not as compelling as altering search_path/shared_preload_libraries.

(That's partly why I posted it as a separate patch.)

> It seems to me that appending and incrementing using the same syntax
> is a) confusing b) will be a limitation before long.

I understand (a), but what sort of limitation do you foresee in (b)?

Do you think both features should be implemented, but with a different
syntax, or are you saying incrementing should not be implemented now?

> > These patches do not affect configuration file parsing in any way:
> > its use is limited to "SET" and "ALTER xxx SET".
> Are you including user / database settings as part of ALTER ... SET?
> Or just SYSTEM?

Yes, it works the same for all of the ALTER … SET variants, including
users and databases.

-- Abhijit

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Kapila 2020-10-21 04:41:06 Re: Add statistics to pg_stat_wal view for wal related parameter tuning
Previous Message Thomas Munro 2020-10-21 04:27:46 Re: parallel distinct union and aggregate support patch