| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tatsuya Kawata <kawatatatsuya0913(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | fabriziomello(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, Jobin Augustine <jobinau(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Improving display of octal GUCs |
| Date: | 2026-07-05 18:19:25 |
| Message-ID: | 767661.1783275565@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tatsuya Kawata <kawatatatsuya0913(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> One minor note: I considered whether check_GUC_init() should
> validate GUC_SHOW_IN_OCTAL (e.g. not allowing it together with a
> show_hook, or with other flags). But some GUCs intentionally use a
> show_hook, and check_GUC_init() validates only a few combinations
> today, so I don't think it's necessary here.
Yeah, I think there actually could be a use-case for having a
show_hook along with GUC_SHOW_IN_OCTAL: if you want the value shown in
octal but the calculation of the effective value is more complicated
than just "show the variable". So I don't want to reject that.
Perhaps there's a case for checking that GUC_SHOW_IN_OCTAL isn't
applied to a non-integer GUC, but I can't get too excited about that.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Noah Misch | 2026-07-05 21:05:33 | ri_Fast* crash w/ nullable UNIQUE constraint |
| Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2026-07-05 17:33:08 | Split fd.c into multiple source files |