Re: postgresql.conf error checking strategy - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: postgresql.conf error checking strategy
Date
Msg-id 201105110000.p4B00Vk05638@momjian.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: postgresql.conf error checking strategy  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 11:10 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> > Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> >> On Sun, May 8, 2011 at 1:04 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> >>> Yes, definitely. ?Perhaps summarize as "rethink how we handle partially
> >>> correct postgresql.conf files". ?Or maybe Robert sees it as "rethink
> >>> approach to making sure all backends share the same value of critical
> >>> settings"? ?Or maybe those are two different TODOs?
> >
> >> The second is what I had in mind. ?I'm thinking that at least for
> >> critical GUCs we need a different mechanism for making sure everything
> >> stays in sync, like having the postmaster write a precompiled file and
> >> convincing the backends to read it in some carefully synchronized
> >> fashion. ?However, it's not clear to me whether something along those
> >> lines (or some other lines) would solve the problem you were
> >> complaining about; therefore it's possible, as you say, that there are
> >> two separate action items here. ?Or maybe not: maybe someone can come
> >> up with an approach that swats both problems in one go.
> >
> > Well, the thing that was annoying me was that because a backend saw one
> > value in postgresql.conf as incorrect, it was refusing to apply any
> > changes at all from postgresql.conf. ?And worse, there was no log entry
> > to give any hint what was going on. ?This doesn't seem to me to have
> > much to do with the problem you're on about. ?I agree it's conceivable
> > that someone might think of a way to solve both issues at once, but
> > I think we'd better list them as separate TODOs.
> 
> OK by me.

Two TODOs added:
Allow postgresql.conf settings to be accepted by backends even if somesettings are invalid for those backends    *
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2011-04/msg00330.php   *
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2011-05/msg00375.phpIncomplete itemAllow all backends to receive
postgresql.confsettingchanges at the same time    * http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2011-04/msg00330.php
* http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2011-05/msg00375.php 
 

--  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
 + It's impossible for everything to be true. +


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Greg Stark
Date:
Subject: Re: the big picture for index-only scans
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: the big picture for index-only scans