Re: BUG #17077: about three parameters in postgresql 13.3
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: BUG #17077: about three parameters in postgresql 13.3 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 66575.1626534254@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: BUG #17077: about three parameters in postgresql 13.3 (Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: BUG #17077: about three parameters in postgresql 13.3
|
Список | pgsql-bugs |
Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com> writes: > On Sat, Jul 17, 2021 at 7:50 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> The code is operating as designed. It does seem odd that there's no >> mention of these variables in the documentation, though. > I think the point that the 3 GUCs have no explanation in the docs but > still show up in the pg_settings was discussed at [1]. There, we > wanted to add GUC_NO_SHOW_ALL for 3 of them. I still would prefer it > because the 3 GUCs will only be used internally(?). I've concluded that we should just document them (and am working on that right now). It's certainly true that there is a use-case for reading them: libpq does "SHOW transaction_read_only", for example. And since we've gone to the trouble of making SET of one of these equivalent to SET TRANSACTION, we should probably just document that it is. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: