Re: Advice regarding configuration parameters - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

Some very good suggestions where made here. What happens next? Will this end
up in a TODO list where someone can "claim the task" (I'm trying to learn
how the process works) ?

Kind regards,

Thomas Hallgren

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Tom Lane" <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: "Joe Conway" <mail@joeconway.com>
Cc: "Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e@gmx.net>; "Thomas Hallgren"
<thhal@mailblocks.com>; <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Sent: Friday, February 06, 2004 19:15
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Advice regarding configuration parameters


> Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com> writes:
> > I like it. I wonder if we ought to have a way to "register" valid
> > classes? Maybe a new guc variable in the form of a list of valid
> > classes. So something like:
>
> There are some order-of-processing issues there, but maybe.  Another
> possibility is that after a shlib has finished registering its
> variables, it could look for remaining placeholders matching its prefix
> and issue WARNINGs about 'em (it can't realistically ERROR, probably,
> but a WARNING would surely help).  These are actually orthogonal checks
> since one addresses the class part and the other the individual variable.
>
> >> And we'd have to think a little about how to handle variable values
> >> that are discovered to be erroneous when we try to assign them to the
> >> variable --- probably we can just drop them, but does that make the
> >> semantics weird at all?
>
> > Maybe we can require a default value as a parameter to
> > add_guc_variable() and use that?
>
> Well, the new GUC variable struct would include a default by definition,
> and presumably that value would "bubble up" to replace any values that
> are found illegal.
>
> The sort of semantic funny I am thinking of is like this:
> * postgresql.conf contains pljava::var = somegoodvalue
> * ALTER DATABASE SET supplies pljava::var = somebadvalue
> For builtin variables the ALTER DATABASE value would be rejected on
> sight and the end result would be that the variable contains
> 'somegoodvalue'.  However if we don't yet know the variable at backend
> startup, 'somebadvalue' will replace 'somegoodvalue' completely, and
> then when the PL actually gets loaded it will get thrown away.  End
> result is that the variable will have whatever its hardwired default is,
> and not 'somegoodvalue' as one would wish.  Even more surprising, a
> subsequent SIGHUP would make it acquire 'somegoodvalue'.
>
> This particular case could be dealt with by forcing a rescan of
> postgresql.conf after new variables are defined (I think we need only do
> so if any errors are detected in assigning values), but that will not
> handle everything.  We don't have any way to get back overridden values
> from other sources such as the postmaster command line.
>
> It seems likely to me that such corner cases are sufficiently bizarre to
> not bother anyone, but we need to think more to make sure that there
> aren't any that would bother someone.
>
> regards, tom lane
>