| From: | Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Marko Tiikkaja <marko(at)joh(dot)to> |
| Subject: | Re: Review: plpgsql.extra_warnings, plpgsql.extra_errors |
| Date: | 2014-03-20 11:39:38 |
| Message-ID: | 532AD37A.908@2ndquadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 20/03/14 00:32, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> TBH, if I thought this specific warning was the only one that would ever
> be there, I'd probably be arguing to reject this patch altogether.
Of course, nobody assumes that it will be the only one.
>
> Also, adding GUC_LIST_INPUT later is not really cool since it changes
> the parsing behavior for the GUC. If it's going to be a list, it should
> be one from day zero.
>
Actually it does not since it all has to be handled in check/assign hook
anyway.
But nevertheless, I made V6 with doc change suggested by Alvaro and also
added this list handling framework for the GUC params.
In the end it is probably less confusing now that the implementation
uses bitmask instead of bool when the user facing functionality talks
about list...
This obviously needs code review again (I haven't changed tests since
nothing changed from user perspective).
--
Petr Jelinek http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| shadow_v6.patch | text/x-patch | 13.0 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Fujii Masao | 2014-03-20 12:03:46 | Re: effective_cache_size cannot be changed by a reload |
| Previous Message | Pavel Stehule | 2014-03-20 08:59:33 | Re: four minor proposals for 9.5 |