Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes:
> On Mon, Mar 25, 2024 at 5:04 PM Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote:
>> To me, externally_managed_configuration is promising a lot more than it
>> delivers because there is still a lot of ocnfiguration it doesn't
>> control. I am also confused why the purpose of the feature, external
>> management of configuation, is part of the variable name. We usually
>> name parameters for what they control.
> I actually agree with this. I wasn't going to quibble with it because
> other people seemed to like it. But I think something like
> allow_alter_system would be better, as it would describe the exact
> thing that the parameter does, rather than how we think the parameter
> ought to be used.
+1. The overpromise-and-underdeliver aspect of the currently proposed
name is a lot of the reason I've been unhappy and kept pushing for it
to lock things down more. "allow_alter_system" is a lot more
straightforward about exactly what it does, and if that is all we want
it to do, then a name like that is good.
regards, tom lane
