From: Robert Haas [mailto:robertmh...@gmail.com] > On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 10:02 AM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > 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.
+1 for a separate patch for remote session configuration. ALTER SYSTEM + SIGHUP targeted at a particular backend would do if the DBA can log into the database server (so, it can't be used for DBaaS.) It would be useful to have pg_reload_conf(pid). Regards Takayuki Tsunakawa
