Re: Permanent settings

From: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine(at)hi-media(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Csaba Nagy <nagy(at)ecircle-ag(dot)com>, Aidan Van Dyk <aidan(at)highrise(dot)ca>
Subject: Re: Permanent settings
Date: 2008-02-20 20:51:12
Message-ID: 47BC92C0.4060402@hagander.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:
> Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> writes:
>> Tom Lane wrote:
>>> No you don't. All you need is the output of the pg_settings view.
>>> Or at least, if that's insufficient, let's discuss exactly how.
>
>> I can read the settings. How do I write them, if the only interface to
>> write them is to deal with the file as a complete unit?
>
> You write the file as a unit --- what's the problem? We already agreed
> that the GUIs would not be trying to preserve comments in the file.

Well, I have to parse the file, and figure out where to have the
setting. And if there are multiple configuration files, I have to parse
multiple configuration files.

And phppgadmin has to implement the exact same parser. As will <insert
third party app here>.

And people like JD who want such a feature *even though they may not be
using the GUI* are left with nothing. (no, he's not the only one)

The point was exactly to move that parsing to the backend.

If we're fine with GUIs messing up the comments, then we can just have
those functions in the backend and be fine with them messing up the
comments.

//Magnus

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Heikki Linnakangas 2008-02-20 20:57:34 Re: Which MemoryContext?
Previous Message Tom Lane 2008-02-20 20:45:27 Re: Permanent settings