Re: How about a psql backslash command to show GUCs?
От | Jonathan S. Katz |
---|---|
Тема | Re: How about a psql backslash command to show GUCs? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 7bba5a32-65fe-04e1-7c36-efd963a625c9@postgresql.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: How about a psql backslash command to show GUCs? (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: How about a psql backslash command to show GUCs?
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 4/11/22 4:11 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > "Jonathan S. Katz" <jkatz@postgresql.org> writes: >> My question is if we're only going to list out the settings that are >> customized, are we going to: > >> 1. Hide a setting if it matches a default value, even if a user set it >> to be the default value? OR >> 2. Comment out all of the settings in a generated postgresql.conf file? > > As committed, it prints anything that's shown as "source != 'default'" > in pg_settings, which means anything for which the value wasn't > taken from the wired-in default. I suppose an alternative definition > could be "setting != boot_val". Not really sure if that's better. > > This idea does somewhat address my unhappiness upthread about printing > values with source = 'internal', but I see that it gets confused by > some GUCs with custom show hooks, like unix_socket_permissions. > Maybe it needs to be "source != 'default' AND setting != boot_val"? Running through a few GUCs, that seems reasonable. Happy to test the patch out prior to commit to see if it renders better. Jonathan
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: