On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 10:02 AM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> writes: > > On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 06:39:24PM +0900, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote: > >> I also thought that there's some other features that is useful if > >> it could be turned on remotely so the remote GUC feature but it > >> was too complex... > > > Well, I am thinking if we want to do something like this, we should do > > it for all GUCs, not just for this one, so I suggest we not do this now > > either. > > I will argue hard that we should not do it at all, ever. > > There is already a mechanism for broadcasting global GUC changes: > apply them to postgresql.conf (or use ALTER SYSTEM) and SIGHUP. > I do not think we need something that can remotely change a GUC's > value in just one session. The potential for bugs, misuse, and > just plain confusion is enormous, and the advantage seems minimal.
I think there might be some merit in being able to activate debugging or tracing facilities for a particular session remotely, but designing something that will do that sort of thing well seems like a very complex problem that certainly should not be sandwiched into another patch that is mostly about something else. And if we ever get such a thing I suspect it should be entirely separate from the GUC system. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
