On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 05:43:17PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > It probably is. I'm just offering this as a solution if people want to > insist on a mechanism to prevent unsafe GUC changes. If we drop the > idea of trying to forcibly prevent extensions from Doing It Wrong, > then we don't need this, only the extra hook.
FWIW, I'd be fine with a simple solution like what Julien has been proposing with the extra hook, rather than a GUC to enforce all that. That may be nice in the long-run, but the potential benefits may not be completely clear, either, after a closer read of this thread. -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
