Re: proposal: a validator for configuration files

From: Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Florian Pflug <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Alexey Kluykin <alexk(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Selena Deckelmann <selena(at)chesnok(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: proposal: a validator for configuration files
Date: 2011-07-18 03:30:48
Message-ID: CAFj8pRDeLNiUu3yGxg5YAqMBXYAt-BjGiYXWE5tKLXeBz_nsKQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

2011/7/18 Florian Pflug <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org>:
> On Jul18, 2011, at 01:29 , Robert Haas wrote:
>> Hmm.  Maybe what we need is a mechanism that allows the configuration
>> to be associated a loadable module, and whenever that module is
>> loaded, we also load the associated configuration settings.  This is
>> probably terribly syntax, but something like:
>>
>> ALTER LOAD 'plpgsql' SET plpgsql.variable_conflict = 'whatever';
>
> A variant of this would be to allow extensions (in the CREATE EXTENSION
> sense) to declare custom GUCs in their control file. Then we'd only
> need to load those files, which seems better than loading a shared
> library.

+1

Pavel

>
> We do expect people to wrap their loadable modules in extensions
> anyway nowadays, do we?
>
> best regards,
> Florian Pflug
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
>

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2011-07-18 04:51:05 Re: reducing the overhead of frequent table locks, v4
Previous Message Robert Haas 2011-07-18 03:25:22 Re: patch: Allow \dd to show constraint comments