| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Nikolay Samokhvalov <samokhvalov(at)gmail(dot)com>, Vik Fearing <vik(at)postgresfriends(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Default gucs for EXPLAIN |
| Date: | 2020-05-29 19:44:29 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoYH_p-y=45SAJ58cU6jsMH6ojgqQZiA2aePpvZ0J+uLbA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 7:30 AM David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> I'm against adding GUCs to control what EXPLAIN does by default.
>
> A few current GUCs come to mind which gives external control to a
> command's behaviour are:
>
> standard_conforming_strings
> backslash_quote
> bytea_output
>
> It's pretty difficult for application authors to write code that will
> just work due to these GUCs. We end up with GUCs like
> escape_string_warning to try and help application authors find areas
> which may be problematic.
I agree with this concern, as well as with what David says later,
namely that the concern is less here than in some other cases but
still not zero.
I do think the idea of changing the default for BUFFERS from OFF to ON
is a pretty good one, though.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2020-05-29 19:47:06 | Re: pie-in-sky idea: 'sensitive' function parameters |
| Previous Message | Chapman Flack | 2020-05-29 19:36:36 | Re: pie-in-sky idea: 'sensitive' function parameters |