| From: | Euler Taveira de Oliveira <euler(at)timbira(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: reloptions with a "namespace" |
| Date: | 2009-02-03 11:49:25 |
| Message-ID: | 49882F45.80500@timbira.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Alvaro Herrera escreveu:
>> IIRC, my last patch includes a partial validation code for RESET cases. For
>> example, the last SQL will not be atomic (invalid reloption silently ignored).
>> So, why not apply the namespace validation code to RESET case too? Patch is
>> attached too.
>
> No, we must not validate the options passed to RESET, because we want to
> be able to reset even options that we do not currently think that are
> valid. Consider that we might be trying to clean up after options set
> by a previous version of a module.
>
Ah, idea withdrawn. But we should at least document this behavior.
--
Euler Taveira de Oliveira
http://www.timbira.com/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Hannu Krosing | 2009-02-03 13:26:06 | Re: Hot Standby (v9d) |
| Previous Message | K, Niranjan (NSN - IN/Bangalore) | 2009-02-03 11:18:22 | Synch Replication |