Re: Overhauling GUCS

From: Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: "Greg Smith" <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com>
Cc: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Overhauling GUCS
Date: 2008-06-06 21:10:53
Message-ID: 87d4muclr6.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

"Greg Smith" <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com> writes:

> 1) Is it worthwhile to expand the information stored in the GUC structure to
> make it better capable of supporting machine generation and to provide more
> information for tool authors via pg_settings? The exact fields that should or
> shouldn't be included remains controversial; consider "default value",
> "per-session/runtime/restart", and "enum lists" as the list of things that are
> most needed there.

Isn't that a list of what's *already* there?

--
Gregory Stark
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
Ask me about EnterpriseDB's PostGIS support!

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum 2008-06-06 21:23:54 Re: Overhauling GUCS
Previous Message Ron Mayer 2008-06-06 21:06:59 Re: Overhauling GUCS