From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Andy Colson <andy(at)squeakycode(dot)net> |
Cc: | Alexey Klyukin <alexk(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: REVIEW proposal: a validator for configuration files |
Date: | 2011-09-07 14:00:34 |
Message-ID: | 5234.1315404034@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andy Colson <andy(at)squeakycode(dot)net> writes:
> Where did the other warnings go? Its right though, line 570 is bad. It also seems to have killed the server. I have not gotten through the history of messages regarding this patch, but is it supposed to kill the server if there is a syntax error in the config file?
The historical behavior is that a configuration file error detected
during postmaster startup should prevent the server from starting, but
an error detected during reload should only result in a LOG message and
the reload not occurring. I don't believe anyone will accept a patch
that causes the server to quit on a failed reload. There has however
been some debate about the exact extent of ignoring bad values during
reload --- currently the theory is "ignore the whole file if anything is
wrong", but there's some support for applying all non-bad values as long
as the overall file syntax is okay.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Kevin Grittner | 2011-09-07 14:02:25 | Re: [v9.2] Fix Leaky View Problem |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2011-09-07 13:58:46 | Re: [v9.2] Fix Leaky View Problem |