Re: Add a GUC check hook to ensure summarize_wal cannot be enabled when wal_level is minimal

From: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Jelte Fennema-Nio <postgres(at)jeltef(dot)nl>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Add a GUC check hook to ensure summarize_wal cannot be enabled when wal_level is minimal
Date: 2024-07-10 18:41:41
Message-ID: Zo7V5Ry9_sDpPmXo@nathan
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Jul 10, 2024 at 11:11:13AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> We went through a ton of permutations of that kind of
> idea years ago, when it first became totally clear that cross-checks
> between GUCs do not work nicely if implemented in check_hooks.
> (You can find all the things we tried in the commit log, although
> I don't recall exactly when.)

Do you remember the general timeframe or any of the GUCs involved? I spent
some time searching through the commit log and mailing lists, but I've thus
far only found allusions to past bad experiences with such hooks.

--
nathan

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Nathan Bossart 2024-07-10 18:59:15 Re: Missed opportunity for bsearch() in TransactionIdIsCurrentTransactionId()?
Previous Message Kirill Reshke 2024-07-10 17:57:45 Re: Allow non-superuser to cancel superuser tasks.