| From: | "Andrey M(dot) Borodin" <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>, gavinpanella(at)gmail(dot)com |
| Subject: | Re: Allow ALTER SYSTEM SET on unrecognized custom GUCs |
| Date: | 2023-10-19 17:29:13 |
| Message-ID: | EC121CE9-A199-4310-A60C-1C735B21D8DD@yandex-team.ru |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> On 17 Oct 2023, at 05:19, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
> In the original discussion about this [1], I initially leaned towards
> "they should both fail", but I reconsidered: there doesn't seem to be
> any harm in allowing ALTER SYSTEM SET to succeed for any custom GUC
> name, as long as you're superuser.
+1 for allowing non-existent custom GUCs.
From time to time we have to roll out custom binaries controlled by GUCs that do not exist in normal binaries. Juggling with postgresql.conf would be painful in this case.
Best regards, Andrey Borodin.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2023-10-19 17:44:20 | controlling meson's parallelism (and some whining) |
| Previous Message | David Steele | 2023-10-19 16:16:51 | Re: The danger of deleting backup_label |