Re: GUC vs variable.c (was Patches applied...) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Thomas Lockhart
Subject Re: GUC vs variable.c (was Patches applied...)
Date
Msg-id 3CC33DFE.4E8BB9D1@fourpalms.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to GUC vs variable.c (was Patches applied...)  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
...
> Ah, but we *have* that ability right now; see Peter's recent changes
> to support per-database and per-user GUC settings.  The functionality
> available for handling GUC-ified variables is now so far superior to
> plain SET that it's really foolish to consider having any parameters
> that are outside GUC control.

istm that with the recent discussion of transaction-fying SET variables
that table-fying some settable parameters may be appropriate. Leave out
the "foolish" from the discussion please ;)
                      - Thomas


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: GUC vs variable.c (was Patches applied...)
Next
From: Joe Conway
Date:
Subject: Re: Patches applied; initdb time!