On Sat, Oct 29, 2022 at 10:40 AM Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com> wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Sep 02, 2022 at 05:24:58PM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> > > > > It caused no issue when I changed:
> > > > >
> > > > > /* Check that it's acceptable for the indicated parameter */
> > > > > if (!parse_and_validate_value(record, name, value,
> > > > > - PGC_S_FILE, ERROR,
> > > > > + PGC_S_TEST, ERROR,
> > > > > &newval, &newextra))
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm not sure where to go from here.
> > > >
> > > > I'm hoping for some guidance ; this simple change may be naive, but I'm not
> > > > sure what a wider change would look like.
I'm still hoping.
> > PGC_S_TEST is a better fit, so my question is whether it's really that
> > simple ?
>
> I've added the trivial change as 0001 and re-opened the patch (which ended
> up in January's CF)
>
> If for some reason it's not really as simple as that, then 001 will
> serve as a "straw-man patch" hoping to elicit discussion on that point.
> From defdb57fe0ec373c1eea8df42f0e1831b3f9c3cc Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Justin Pryzby <pryzbyj@telsasoft.com>
> Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2022 15:52:11 -0500
> Subject: [PATCH v6 1/4] WIP: test GUCs from ALTER SYSTEM as PGC_S_TEST not
> FILE
>
> WIP: ALTER SYSTEM should use PGC_S_TEST rather than PGC_S_FILE
>
> Since the value didn't come from a file. Or maybe we should have
> another PGC_S_ value for this, or a flag for 'is a test'.
> ---
> src/backend/utils/misc/guc.c | 2 +-
> src/include/utils/guc.h | 1 +
> 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/src/backend/utils/misc/guc.c b/src/backend/utils/misc/guc.c
> index 6f21752b844..ae8810591d6 100644
> --- a/src/backend/utils/misc/guc.c
> +++ b/src/backend/utils/misc/guc.c
> @@ -4435,7 +4435,7 @@ AlterSystemSetConfigFile(AlterSystemStmt *altersysstmt)
>
> /* Check that it's acceptable for the indicated parameter */
> if (!parse_and_validate_value(record, name, value,
> - PGC_S_FILE, ERROR,
> + PGC_S_TEST, ERROR,
> &newval, &newextra))
> ereport(ERROR,
> (errcode(ERRCODE_INVALID_PARAMETER_VALUE),
This is rebased over my own patch to enable checks for
REGRESSION_TEST_NAME_RESTRICTIONS.
--
Justin
