From: | "Joel Jacobson" <joel(at)compiler(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | "Fabien COELHO" <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr> |
Cc: | "PostgreSQL Developers" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, "Michael Paquier" <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Implement motd for PostgreSQL |
Date: | 2021-04-04 05:55:16 |
Message-ID: | 3e22556b-deb9-4872-aecf-c61919c27c83@www.fastmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Apr 3, 2021, at 17:50, Fabien COELHO wrote:
> > Perhaps the configuration-file parser has been fixed since to support
> > embedded newlines? If so, then maybe it would actually be an idea to
> > support newlines by escaping them?
>
> Dunno.
>
> If such a feature gets considered, I'm not sure I'd like to actually edit
> pg configuration file to change the message.
For the ALTER SYSTEM case, the value would be written to postgresql.auto.conf,
and that file we shouldn't edit manually anyway, right?
>
> The actual source looks pretty straightforward. I'm wondering whether pg
> style would suggest to write motd != NULL instead of just motd.
That's what I had originally, but when reviewing my code verifying code style,
I noticed the other case it more common:
if \([a-z]* != NULL &&
119 results in 72 files
if \([a-z]* &&
936 results in 311 files
>
> I'm wondering whether it should be possible to designate (1) a file the
> content of which would be shown, or (2) a command, the output of which
> would be shown [ok, there might be security implications on this one].
Can't we just do that via plpgsql and EXECUTE somehow?
/Joel
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Joel Jacobson | 2021-04-04 06:23:56 | Re: [PATCH] Implement motd for PostgreSQL |
Previous Message | Jaime Casanova | 2021-04-04 05:25:50 | Re: Crash in BRIN minmax-multi indexes |