| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: timezone GUC |
| Date: | 2011-05-23 02:24:06 |
| Message-ID: | 19473.1306117446@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 9:54 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> But also, 99.999% of the time
>> it would be completely wasted effort because the DBA wouldn't remove the
>> postgresql.conf setting at all, ever.
> Well, by that argument, we ought not to worry about masterminding what
> happens if the DBA does do such a thing -- just run the whole process
> and damn the torpedoes. If it causes a brief database stall, at least
> they'll get the correct behavior.
Yeah, maybe. But I don't especially want to document "If you remove a
pre-existing setting of TimeZone from postgresql.conf, expect your
database to lock up hard for multiple seconds" ... and I think we
couldn't responsibly avoid mentioning it. At the moment that disclaimer
reads more like "If you remove a pre-existing setting of TimeZone from
postgresql.conf, the database will fall back to a default that might not
be what you were expecting". Is A really better than B?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kevin Grittner | 2011-05-23 02:26:34 | Re: SSI predicate locking on heap -- tuple or row? |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2011-05-23 02:13:50 | Re: [BUGS] BUG #6034: pg_upgrade fails when it should not. |