| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Konstantin Knizhnik <k(dot)knizhnik(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Nikolay Samokhvalov <samokhvalov(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Built-in connection pooling |
| Date: | 2018-04-26 02:09:08 |
| Message-ID: | 20180426020908.GD18940@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 03:42:31PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> The difficulty of finding them all is really the problem. If we had a
> reliable way to list everything that needs to be moved into session
> state, then we could try to come up with a design to do that.
> Otherwise, we're just swatting issues one by one and I bet we're
> missing quite a few.
Hm? We already know about the reset value of a parameter in
pg_settings, which points out to the value which would be used if reset
in a session, even after ebeing reloaded. If you compare it with the
actual setting value, wouldn't that be enough to know which parameters
have been changed at session-level by an application once connecting?
So you can pull out a list using such comparisons. The context a
parameter is associated to can also help.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Craig Ringer | 2018-04-26 02:16:52 | Re: PostgreSQL's handling of fsync() errors is unsafe and risks data loss at least on XFS |
| Previous Message | Noah Misch | 2018-04-26 01:53:38 | Re: pg_recvlogical broken in back branches |