Re: SQL command to edit postgresql.conf, with comments

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndquadrant(dot)fr>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Darren Duncan <darren(at)darrenduncan(dot)net>, postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: SQL command to edit postgresql.conf, with comments
Date: 2010-10-14 22:02:23
Message-ID: 5598.1287093743@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:
> I kind of dislike SET PERMANENT as a command name, partly because I
> think it sounds more certain than it really is, and partly because
> it's asymmetric with the other, similar GUC-setting commands, which
> are:

> ALTER ROLE name [ IN DATABASE database_name ] SET
> configuration_parameter { TO | = } { value | DEFAULT }
> ALTER DATABASE name SET configuration_parameter { TO | = } { value | DEFAULT }

> Perhaps ALTER SYSTEM SET configuration_parameter { TO | = } { value |
> DEFAULT } ?

That might be a good idea. One argument for it is that you could
extend this syntax to include an optional comment, which would avoid
having to wedge an inherently non-transactional operation into
COMMENT ON. Say

ALTER SYSTEM SET foo = 'bar' COMMENT 'hacked by tgl 10/13/2010';

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2010-10-14 22:05:48 Re: [HACKERS] Docs for archive_cleanup_command are poor
Previous Message Tom Lane 2010-10-14 21:57:37 Re: [JDBC] Support for JDBC setQueryTimeout, et al.