Re: [RFC] Extend namespace of valid guc names - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andres Freund
Subject Re: [RFC] Extend namespace of valid guc names
Date
Msg-id 20130906223110.GD626072@alap2.anarazel.de
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [RFC] Extend namespace of valid guc names  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: [RFC] Extend namespace of valid guc names
List pgsql-hackers
On 2013-09-06 14:48:33 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> > On 2013-09-06 10:13:23 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Well, if you feel an absolute compulsion to make them consistent, I'd
> >> go with making SET disallow creation of variables with names the file
> >> parser wouldn't recognize.  But why is it such a bad thing if SET can
> >> do that?
> 
> > Also, ALTER SYSTEM SET is going to need a similar restriction as well,
> > otherwise the server won't restart although the GUCs pass validation...
> 
> Well, sure, but I would think that ALTER SYSTEM SET should be constrained
> to only set known GUCs, not invent new ones on the fly.

Hm. That sounds inconvenient to me. Consider something like configuring
the system to use auto_explain henceforth.
ALTER SYSTEM SET shared_preload_libraries = 'auto_explain';
ALTER SYSTEM SET auto_explain.log_min_duration = 100;

It seems weird to forbid doing that and requiring a manual LOAD when we
don't do so for normal SETs. I can live with the restriction if we
decide it's a good idea, I just wouldn't appreciate it.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

-- Andres Freund                       http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training &
Services



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] encouraging index-only scans
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: [RFC] Extend namespace of valid guc names