Re: Remove redundant extra_desc info for enum GUC variables?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: Remove redundant extra_desc info for enum GUC variables?
Date: 2008-05-27 18:24:44
Message-ID: 6998.1211912684@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> writes:
>> One point of interest is that for client_min_messages and
>> log_min_messages, the ordering of the values has significance, and
>> it's different for the two cases.

> Is there any actual reason why they're supposed to be treated
> differently?

Yeah: LOG level sorts differently in the two cases; it's fairly high
priority for server log output and much lower for client output.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alex Hunsaker 2008-05-27 18:25:49 Re: Hiding undocumented enum values?
Previous Message Tom Lane 2008-05-27 18:20:01 Re: ERRORDATA_STACK_SIZE panic crashes on Windows