|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|
|Views:||Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email|
> 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
> 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.
|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|