Re: Overhauling GUCS

On Fri, 6 Jun 2008, Gregory Stark wrote:

> "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?

I should have been clearer there. Some of the items suggested are already
in the structure, but aren't visible via pg_settings. In those cases it's
just exporting information that's already there. In others (like the
suggestion to add a URL to the documentation) it is actually a new field
being added as well as its corresponding entry in the settings view.

--
* Greg Smith gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com http://www.gregsmith.com Baltimore, MD