Hi, On 2020-10-20 14:16:12 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> writes: > > Given that this is just SQL level, I don't see why we'd need a special > > type of language here. You can just use DO etc. > > I'd make that point against the whole proposal. There's nothing here that > can't be done with current_setting() + set_config(). I'm pretty dubious > about layering extra functionality into such a fundamental utility command > as SET; and the fact that we've gone twenty-odd years without similar > previous proposals doesn't speak well for it being really useful.
>From my POV it'd make sense to have SET support mirroring config file syntax if we had it. And there've certainly been requests for that... The one case where I can see SET support being useful even without config support is to allow for things like ALTER DATABASE somedatabase SET search_path += 'myapp'; Greetings, Andres Freund
