On 2013-08-01 15:17:04 +0100, Greg Stark wrote:
> We don't need per guc locking. This is the whole objection Tom had about
> this patch being more complex than it has to be.
IIRC he objected to using locking *at all* because a simple
one-file-per-setting approach should be used.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services