On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 05:41:02PM -0500, David Christensen wrote:
> The two-arg form of the current_setting() function will allow a
> fallback value to be returned instead of throwing an error when an
> unknown GUC is provided. This would come in most useful when using
> custom GUCs; e.g.:
There already _is_ a two-argument form of current_setting() that yours
somewhat conflicts with:
current_setting(setting_name [, missing_ok ])
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/functions-admin.html
I often use
coalesce(current_setting(setting_name, true), default_value_here)
as an implementation of current_setting() with a default value.
You could treat booleans as the second argument as a missing_ok argument
instead of a default value, since _currently_ current_setting() only
returns TEXT.
But if ever GUCs are allowed to have values of other types, then your
two-argument current_setting() will conflict with boolean GUCs.
There are several ways to prevent such a future conflict. Here are
some:
- make a two-argument current_setting() for boolean GUCs treat the second argument as a default value (since there are
nosuch GUCs today, this won't break anything)
- use a new function name
- use a three-argument current_setting()
The third option seems very lame to me. So I'd argue for either of the
other two.
Nico
--
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
