Re: pg_primary_conninfo

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pg_primary_conninfo
Date: 2010-12-28 17:12:00
Message-ID: 4DB60C33-B2BA-4DBA-AFA6-3B225AF2D075@gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Dec 28, 2010, at 10:34 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> I'm still wondering what's the actual use-case for exposing this inside
> SQL. Those with a legitimate need-to-know can look at the slave
> server's config files, no?

SQL access is frequently more convenient, though. Although maybe now that we've made recovery.conf use the GUC lexer we oughta continue in that vein and expose those parameters as PGC_INTERNAL GUCs rather than inventing a new function for it...

...Robert

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2010-12-28 17:12:07 Re: Patch to add table function support to PL/Tcl (Todo item)
Previous Message Aidan Van Dyk 2010-12-28 17:10:37 Re: pg_dump --split patch