From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Nitin Jadhav <nitinjadhavpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Fix GUC_NO_SHOW_ALL test scenario in 003_check_guc.pl |
Date: | 2023-02-03 19:37:51 |
Message-ID: | 1719169.1675453071@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Nitin Jadhav <nitinjadhavpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> My concern is if we do this, then we will end up having some policies
> (which can be read from pg_show_all_settings()) in guc.sql and some in
> guc.c. I feel all these should be at one place either at guc.c or
> guc.sql.
I don't particularly see why that needs to be the case. Notably,
if we're interested in enforcing a policy even for extension GUCs,
guc.sql can't really do that since who knows whether the extension's
author will bother to run that test with the extension loaded.
On the other hand, moving *all* those checks into guc.c is probably
impractical and certainly will add undesirable startup overhead.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Corey Huinker | 2023-02-03 19:41:56 | Re: proposal: psql: show current user in prompt |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2023-02-03 19:32:39 | First draft of back-branch release notes is done |