From: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Audit of logout |
Date: | 2014-07-28 13:15:58 |
Message-ID: | CAHGQGwG15wz1rK1MRbms0Qy6h6qEDD+2ouCZo2mHv59qavKmrQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 12:22 PM, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 1:13 AM, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 11:39 PM, Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> wrote:
>>
>> No. If we change it to PGC_SIGHUP, SHOW command does display
>> the changed value after a reload. It's the same behavior as other
>> PGC_SIGHUP parameters do. Attached patch just changes it to PGC_SIGHUP.
>> You can test that by using the patch.
>
> As this patch is marked as Needs Review, so I went ahead and
> picked up for review, however after reading mail chain, it seems to
> me that there is a general inclination to have a new category in
> GucContext for this feature. I don't see the patch implementing the
> same in this thread, so I think it is better to move it to next CF
> (2014-08).
Yep, agreed. I just moved this to next CF.
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Albe Laurenz | 2014-07-28 13:18:09 | Re: [GENERAL] pg_dump behaves differently for different archive formats |
Previous Message | Fujii Masao | 2014-07-28 13:05:40 | Re: config.sgml referring to unix_socket_directories on older releases |