| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Jelte Fennema-Nio <me(at)jeltef(dot)nl>, Jacob Burroughs <jburroughs(at)instructure(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Dave Cramer <davecramer(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Andrey M(dot) Borodin" <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Add new protocol message to change GUCs for usage with future protocol-only GUCs |
| Date: | 2024-01-05 17:08:39 |
| Message-ID: | CA+Tgmoa6TSQ-redQnp1OjVfimz+Ye=fcvAsn-ogsTcegsksUDg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Jan 5, 2024 at 11:53 AM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> There is a lot of infrastructure we'll have to re-invent if
> we make this completely independent of GUCs, notably:
> * a way to establish the initial/default value
> * a way to display the active value
>
> So my thought was that this should be implemented as an (unchangeable)
> flag bit for a GUC variable, GUC_PROTOCOL_ONLY or something like that,
> and then we would refuse SQL-based set attempts on that. The behavior
> would end up being very much like PGC_BACKEND variables, in that we
> could allow all the existing setting methods to work to establish
> a session's initial value; but after that, it can only change within
> that session via a protocol message from the client. With that
> rule, it's okay for the protocol message to be nontransactional since
> there's no interaction with transactions.
Maybe, but it seems like it might be complicated to make that work
with the existing GUC code. GUCs are fundamentally transactional, I
think.
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jelte Fennema-Nio | 2024-01-05 17:20:46 | Re: Add new protocol message to change GUCs for usage with future protocol-only GUCs |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2024-01-05 17:04:32 | Re: Why is src/test/modules/committs/t/002_standby.pl flaky? |