Re: Proposal: pg_confcheck - syntactic & semantic validation of postgresql configuration files - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andres Freund
Subject Re: Proposal: pg_confcheck - syntactic & semantic validation of postgresql configuration files
Date
Msg-id 01C9E007-56C3-4C48-997A-9C7493A41E27@anarazel.de
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Proposal: pg_confcheck - syntactic & semantic validation of postgresql configuration files  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: Proposal: pg_confcheck - syntactic & semantic validation of postgresql configuration files  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
On October 14, 2015 7:45:53 PM GMT+02:00, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>Amir Rohan wrote:
>
>> it does fail the "dependent options" test:
>> $ postgres -C "archive_mode"
>> on
>> $ postgres -C wal_level
>> minimal
>> 
>> no errors, great, let's try it:
>> $ pg_ctl restart
>> 
>> FATAL:  WAL archival cannot be enabled when wal_level is "minimal"
>
>This complaint could be fixed we had a --check-config that runs the
>check hook for every variable, I think.

The problem is that this, and some others, invariant is checked outside the GUC framework. Which we should probably
change,which IIRC will require some new infrastructure.
 

Andres

--- 
Please excuse brevity and formatting - I am writing this on my mobile phone.



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: Proposal: pg_confcheck - syntactic & semantic validation of postgresql configuration files
Next
From: Shay Rojansky
Date:
Subject: Re: Allow ssl_renegotiation_limit in PG 9.5