| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp>, Ian Barwick <ian(dot)barwick(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: let's make the list of reportable GUCs configurable (was Re: Add %r substitution for psql prompts to show recovery status) |
| Date: | 2018-01-10 20:55:07 |
| Message-ID: | 21454.1515617707@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> But if we add this feature and somebody wants to use it for
> server_version_num, it's really pretty simple. In the startup packet,
> you say _pq_.report=server_version_num. Then, you call
> PQparameterStatus(conn, "server_version_num"). If you don't get a
> value, you try calling PQparameterStatus(conn, "server_version") and
> extracting the second word. If that still doesn't work then you give
> up. That doesn't seem either useless or difficult to implement
> correctly from here.
Yeah, but what's the point? If yuou have to maintain the server_version
parsing code anyway, you're not saving any complexity with this. You're
just creating a code backwater that you probably won't test adequately.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | legrand legrand | 2018-01-10 21:20:03 | Re: AS OF queries |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2018-01-10 20:35:33 | Re: let's make the list of reportable GUCs configurable (was Re: Add %r substitution for psql prompts to show recovery status) |