Re: [gsmith@gregsmith.com: Re: [patch] GUC source file and line number] - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: [gsmith@gregsmith.com: Re: [patch] GUC source file and line number]
Date
Msg-id 1359.1220468139@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [gsmith@gregsmith.com: Re: [patch] GUC source file and line number]  (Greg Smith <gsmith@gregsmith.com>)
Responses Re: [patch] GUC source file and line number]  (Greg Smith <gsmith@gregsmith.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Greg Smith <gsmith@gregsmith.com> writes:
> On Tue, 2 Sep 2008, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> How about having two new columns "reset value" and "boot value"?
>> 
>> Like it better than "default value" ...

> It's being a bit pedantic at the expense of the user, but I don't really 
> care that much here.  I exposed the boot_val and described it in the 
> documentation as:

> "Default value if the parameter is not explicitly set"

If that statement were the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the
truth, and if it didn't ignore the point about "explicitly set WHERE?",
I'd be fine with it.

> That was why I just picked the more important one 
> and named it "default";

More important to whom?  You are adopting a very narrow mindset,
which seems to be that only DBAs look at this view.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Joshua Drake
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Cleanup of GUC units code
Next
From: "Greg Sabino Mullane"
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Cleanup of GUC units code