From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
---|---|
To: | Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com> |
Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, bruce(at)momjian(dot)us, tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us |
Subject: | Re: GUC flags |
Date: | 2022-02-07 02:40:12 |
Message-ID: | YgCGjDK/b13shS0o@paquier.xyz |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Feb 06, 2022 at 02:09:45PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Actually, I am thinking that we should implement it before retiring
> completely check_guc, but not in the fashion you are suggesting. I
> would be tempted to add something in the TAP tests as of
> src/test/misc/, where we initialize an instance to get the information
> about all the GUCs from SQL, and map that to the sample file located
> at pg_config --sharedir. I actually have in my patch set for
> pg_upgrade's TAP a perl routine that could be used for this purpose,
> as of the following in Cluster.pm:
I have been poking at that, and this is finishing to be pretty
elegant as of the attached. With this in place, we are able to
cross-check GUCs marked as NOT_IN_SAMPLE (or not) with the contents of
postgresql.conf.sample, so as check_guc could get retired without us
losing much.
I am planning to apply the Cluster.pm part of the patch separately,
for clarity, as I want this routine in place for some other patch.
--
Michael
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
0001-Add-TAP-test-to-automate-check_guc.patch | text/x-diff | 3.8 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2022-02-07 02:53:41 | Re: pg_receivewal - couple of improvements |
Previous Message | Fujii Masao | 2022-02-07 01:45:34 | Re: [PATCH] Add min() and max() aggregate functions for xid8 |