Re: [PATCH] Proof of concept for GUC improvements

From: David Christensen <david(at)pgguru(dot)net>
To: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Cary Huang <cary(dot)huang(at)highgo(dot)ca>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Proof of concept for GUC improvements
Date: 2021-11-03 21:50:20
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> On Nov 3, 2021, at 5:35 AM, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> wrote:
>>> On 15 Oct 2021, at 23:54, Cary Huang <cary(dot)huang(at)highgo(dot)ca> wrote:
>> I scanned through the GUC list and found that the following parameters can
>> potentially be categorized in the "special_disabled0" group, just for your
>> reference.
> This patch no longer applies, can you please submit a rebased version? Also,
> do you have any thoughts on Cary's suggestion in the above review?

Hi, enclosed is a v3, which includes the rebase as well as the additional int GUCs mentioned in Cary’s review. I can add support for Reals (required for the JIT and several other ones), but wanted to get feedback/buy-in on the overall idea first.



Attachment Content-Type Size
special-guc-values-v3.patch application/octet-stream 35.1 KB

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Mark Dilger 2021-11-03 21:52:12 Re: pg14 psql broke \d datname.nspname.relname
Previous Message Thomas Munro 2021-11-03 21:06:34 Re: [PATCH] Native spinlock support on RISC-V