Re: GUC flags

From: Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com
Cc: michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz, peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, bruce(at)momjian(dot)us, tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us
Subject: Re: GUC flags
Date: 2022-01-06 05:35:54
Message-ID: 20220106.143554.2210494341680176602.horikyota.ntt@gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

At Tue, 4 Jan 2022 21:06:48 -0600, Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com> wrote in
> On Wed, Jan 05, 2022 at 11:47:57AM +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> > At Tue, 28 Dec 2021 20:32:40 -0600, Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com> wrote in
> In that case, *all* the flags should be exposed. There's currently 20, which
> means it may not work well after all - it's already too long, and could get
> longer, and/or overflow the alphabet...

Yeah, if we show all 20 properties, the string is too long as well as
all properties cannot have a sensible abbreviation character..

regards.

--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Justin Pryzby 2022-01-06 05:36:42 Re: GUC flags
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2022-01-06 05:21:15 Re: Refactoring of compression options in pg_basebackup