Re: Doc patch, normalize search_path in index

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Karl O(dot) Pinc" <kop(at)meme(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Doc patch, normalize search_path in index
Date: 2013-01-25 18:45:23
Message-ID: 20130125184523.GH6848@momjian.us
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 01:42:48PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> > On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 01:35:49PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> This patch seems pretty bizarre. What is the difference between a
> >> "configuration parameter" and a "run-time setting"? Why would you
> >> point people to two different places for those two terms?
>
> > Should I make them both "configuration parameter" and leave the
> > "security" as a second one separate?
>
> Works for me. I think "configuration parameter" is the phrase we
> use most places.

OK, attached patch applied.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +

Attachment Content-Type Size
search_path2.diff text/x-diff 568 bytes

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2013-01-25 18:46:46 Re: Doc patch, normalize search_path in index
Previous Message Tom Lane 2013-01-25 18:42:48 Re: Doc patch, normalize search_path in index