| From: | Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, bruce(at)momjian(dot)us, tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us |
| Subject: | Re: GUC flags |
| Date: | 2022-02-07 03:04:14 |
| Message-ID: | 20220207030414.GC31460@telsasoft.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Thanks for working on it.
Your test is checking that stuff in sample.conf is actually a GUC and not
marked NOT_IN_SAMPLE. But those are both unlikely mistakes to make.
The important/interesting test is the opposite: that all GUCs are present in
the sample file. It's a lot easier for someone to forget to add a GUC to
sample.conf than it is for someone to accidentally add something that isn't a
GUC.
I'd first parse the GUC-like lines in the file, making a list of gucs_in_file
and then compare the two lists.
--
Justin
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2022-02-07 03:14:00 | Re: [BUG]Update Toast data failure in logical replication |
| Previous Message | Kyotaro Horiguchi | 2022-02-07 03:02:58 | Re: Add checkpoint and redo LSN to LogCheckpointEnd log message |