Josh Berkus escribió:
> On 03/12/2014 03:58 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> > I don't like the idea of using reloptions to let people attach
> > arbitrary unvalidated settings to tables. I consider the way things
> > work with GUCs to be a bug, not a feature, and definitely not
> > something I want to propagate into every other area of the system
> > where the underlying storage format happens to allow it.
>
> +1. Relopts are one of the uglier warts we have.
I'm not sure what you're plus-oneing here, but I hope it's not the
ability to set custom reloptions altogether. As I interpret what Robert
was saying, it was "let's not have *unvalidated* reloptions", with which
I'm fine --- it only means we need to make sure custom reloptions are
validated, in some way yet to be agreed.
I agree that it has gotten too late for this in 9.4, also.
I don't see what's so ugly about reloptions as they currently exist,
anyway.
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
