Re: archive modules - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: archive modules
Date
Msg-id 1061703.1665687218@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: archive modules  (Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: archive modules  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
List pgsql-hackers
Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com> writes:
> On Thu, Oct 13, 2022 at 03:25:27PM +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
>> The intent here looks reasonable to me. However, why should the user
>> be able to set both archive_command and archive_library in the first
>> place only to later fail in LoadArchiveLibrary() per the patch? IMO,
>> the check_hook() is the right way to disallow any sorts of GUC
>> misconfigurations, no?

> There was some discussion upthread about using the GUC hooks to enforce
> this [0].  In general, it doesn't seem to be a recommended practice.

Yeah, it really does not work to use GUC hooks to enforce multi-variable
constraints.  We've learned that the hard way (more than once, if memory
serves).

            regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: PG upgrade 14->15 fails - database contains our own extension
Next
From: Nathan Bossart
Date:
Subject: Re: Suppressing useless wakeups in walreceiver