Hi, After looking at this ever more today, I think "Server Parameter Settings" > is confusing as well. I think "Connection Status" instead of > "Current Status" as is defined in v36 will work better. > This way we will have "Connection Info" and "Connection Status". > Connection Status will reflect the values of specific parameters > that the server reports. >
Noted. > Including all the parameters in [1] under > "Server Parameter Settings" (or "Connection Status") > seems like the easy choice here. Some may not be as useful as > others, but I don't think we should pick and choose either. > Maybe someone else has other thoughts about this? > Sure, let's wait for others' opinions. > We can include role by marking the "role" guc with > the GUC_REPORT flag in guc_tables.c. I really think > without it, the is_superuser field will be incomplete. > This is because either "role" or "session authorization" > will change the is_superuser. > Thanks! I will take a look. > A thought also, that if we do choose to report all the parameters > in [1], it should be coded in a more dynamic way. Maybe loop > through the conn->pstatus list? For example I see "search_path" > will be added to the list in the next release. > If we loop through conn->pstatus, we will be bypassing the official API. The list is of type pgParameterStatus, which is an internal struct defined in libpq-int.h. As the file's header warns, including this file can lead to issues. Or am I missing something? Regards, Hunaid Sohail
