Alvaro Herrera escreveu: > Tom Lane escribió: >> Greg Stark <gsst...@mit.edu> writes: >>> Still far from convinced on that one. But effective_io_concurrency >>> should be included even in the first pass. >> I think a design that is limited to a prespecified set of GUCs is >> broken by definition. It'd be better to make it work like >> ALTER DATABASE SET. > > Well, not exactly like ALTER DATABASE SET because those are now stored > in pg_db_role_setting. But a new spcoptions column storing an array of > key/value pairs seems a reasonable way to do it. > +1. That's what I have in mind too.
-- Euler Taveira de Oliveira http://www.timbira.com/ -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
