Re: How about a psql backslash command to show GUCs?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Jonathan S(dot) Katz" <jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Cc: Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com>, Christoph Berg <myon(at)debian(dot)org>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>, Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>, Mark Dilger <mark(dot)dilger(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: How about a psql backslash command to show GUCs?
Date: 2022-04-09 16:27:12
Message-ID: 4115803.1649521632@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

"Jonathan S. Katz" <jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org> writes:
> -1, at least for the moment. Sometimes a user doesn't know what they're
> looking for coupled with being unaware of what the default value is. If
> a setting is set to a default value and that value is the problematic
> setting, a user should be able to see that even in a full list.

Sure, but then you do "\dconfig *". With there being several hundred
GUCs (and no doubt more coming), I'm not sure that "show me every GUC"
is a common use-case at all, let alone so common as to deserve being
the default behavior.

One thing we could perhaps do to reduce confusion is to change the
table heading when doing this, say from "List of configuration parameters"
to "List of non-default configuration parameters".

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2022-04-09 16:31:23 Re: Add parameter jit_warn_above_fraction
Previous Message Andrey Borodin 2022-04-09 16:25:01 Re: why pg_walfile_name() cannot be executed during recovery?