From: | David Johnston <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Merging postgresql.conf and postgresql.auto.conf |
Date: | 2015-01-17 05:11:38 |
Message-ID: | CAKFQuwZgQr=8afoCcnaC-qeJAPYrBLF+8NP9xKGax4BcGhBy1g@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 10:08 PM, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 17, 2015 at 10:02 AM, David G Johnston <
> david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > > You're right.
> > > pg_setting and SHOW command use value in current session rather than
> > > config file.
> > > It might break these common infrastructure.
> >
> > Two changes solve this problem in what seems to be a clean way.
> > 1) Upon each parsing of postgresql.conf we store all assigned variables
> > somewhere
> > 2) We display these assignments in a new pg_settings column named
> > "system_reset_val"
> >
> > I would also extend this to include:
> > a) upon each parsing of postgresql.auto.conf we store all assigned
> variables
> > somewhere (maybe the same place as postgresql.conf and simply label the
> file
> > source)
>
> Do we need to perform this parsing whenever user queries pg_settings?
> I think it might lead to extra cycles of reading file when user won't even
> need it and as the code is shared with SHOW commands that could be
> slightly complicated.
>
>
There would be no parsing upon reading of pg_settings, only lookups. The
existing parsing would simply have its values saved to the catalogs that
will be involved in the underlying pg_setting view query.
David J.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2015-01-17 05:19:41 | Re: Merging postgresql.conf and postgresql.auto.conf |
Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2015-01-17 05:08:38 | Re: Merging postgresql.conf and postgresql.auto.conf |