Tom Lane wrote:
>
>I am sort of on the fence about this. I am thinking that it would be
>good to expose this information, but *only* to superusers. It would not
>take much code to add a GUC variable flag bit that prevents
>non-superusers from examining the value of the GUC variable, and only a
>little more code to reflect the correct paths into these variables all
>the time.
>
>
>
>
On the basis that I can't see that anyone but the superuser has a
legitimate interest in the info, this sounds good.
cheers
andrew
