Re: GUC flags

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: 2022-02-08 03:07:28
Message-ID: 20220208030727.GH31460@telsasoft.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Feb 08, 2022 at 10:44:07AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> What do you think about the updated version attached? I have applied
> the addition of config_data() separately.

Looks fine

> + # Check if this line matches a GUC parameter.
> + if ($line =~ m/^#?([_[:alpha:]]+) (= .*|[^ ]*$)/)

I think this is the regex I wrote to handle either "name = value" or "name
value", which was needed between f47ed79cc..4d7c3e344. See skip_equals.

It's fine the way it is, but could also remove the 2nd half of the alternation
(|), since GUCs shouldn't be added to sample.conf without '='.

--
Justin

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2022-02-08 03:19:33 Re: [RFC] building postgres with meson - perl embedding
Previous Message wangw.fnst@fujitsu.com 2022-02-08 02:59:34 RE: Logical replication timeout problem