From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: plpgsql GUC variable: custom or built-in? |
Date: | 2010-04-21 21:02:38 |
Message-ID: | 15736.1271883758@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
I wrote:
> Well, if there are no other comments, I'll push forward with the fix
> proposed here:
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2009-11/msg00531.php
Done. I did not make the change I speculated about of allowing
completely unknown variables (those that don't even match
custom_variable_classes) to be set by superusers. It would be a very
minor tweak to the committed code to allow that, but I'm not convinced
that making a corner case in dump/restore slightly easier is worth the
loss of error checking. In practice, if you have ALTER ... SETs for
custom variables, you'd better list their modules in
custom_variable_classes, or it won't work nicely. I see no really
strong reason not to fix that parameter before you restore instead of
after.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | John R Pierce | 2010-04-21 21:06:47 | Re: libpq connectoin redirect |
Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2010-04-21 20:11:08 | Re: Should database = all in pg_hba.conf match a replication connection? |