From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila(at)huawei(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Boszormenyi Zoltan <zb(at)cybertec(dot)at>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Proposal for Allow postgresql.conf values to be changed via SQL [review] |
Date: | 2013-03-21 19:17:54 |
Message-ID: | 20130321191754.GC3685@alvh.no-ip.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Greg Smith escribió:
> On 3/21/13 2:38 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> >Also, while I think that MOST people will probably want a SIGHUP right
> >after SET PERSISTENT, I am not sure that EVERYONE will want that. If
> >you want it and it doesn't happen automatically, you can always do it
> >by hand.
>
> This is a fair position, and since that's how the feature as written
> right now works that helps. I think proceeding this way needs to
> hand some sort of hint back to the user though, telling them the
> change isn't active until SIGHUP. The path I don't want to see if
> where someone uses SET PERSISTENT and can't figure out why nothing
> changed. It should be as obvious as we can make it to someone that
> the explicit reload is necessary.
Maybe add some syntax to prevent the SIGHUP for the rare case where that
is wanted, say
SET PERSISTENT (reload=off) var=val;
(perhaps WITH at the end, dunno)
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2013-03-21 19:32:24 | Re: Should commit_delay be PGC_SIGHUP? |
Previous Message | Kevin Grittner | 2013-03-21 19:16:51 | Re: hstore compiler warnings |