In response to Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>:
> Bill Moran <wmoran@collaborativefusion.com> writes:
> > Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> wrote:
> >>> Might be more robust to say
> >>> if (trace_temp_files >= 0)
>
> > I specified in the GUC config that minimum allowable value is -1.
>
> I'd still tend to go with Andrew's suggestion because it makes this
> particular bit of code self-defending against bad values. Yes, it's
> reasonably safe given that bit of coding way over yonder in guc.c,
> but there's no particularly good reason why this code has to depend
> on that to avoid doing something stupid. And it's easier to understand
> too --- you don't have to go looking in guc.c to convince yourself it's
> safe.
Ahh ... well, I've probably already argued about it more than it's worth.
The patch is easy enough to adjust, find attached.
--
Bill Moran
Collaborative Fusion Inc.
