* Josh Berkus (j...@agliodbs.com) wrote: > I really think this is the wrong approach. If we start removing > "unsafe" parameters from ALTER SYSTEM SET, we basically hobble the > feature to the point of uselessness. Out of the 15 or so parameters 80% > of our users touch, half of them are on your "unsafe" list.
Reflecting on this a bit more, I'm curious what your list-of-15 is.
Many of the items on my list were file locations or other things which
generally require coordination with other groups (like the unix admins
or network admins) to change, eg: listen_addresses, port, SSL or
Kerberos file locations, etc.
There's quite a few parameters which I've changed that are "safe" and
internal-to-PG which weren't on my list- work_mem, maint_work_mem,
vacuum / autovacuum settings, effective_io_concurrency, wal_level,
sync_commit, checkpoint settings, max_wal_senders, planner costs,
logging settings (though this might have to be coordinated w/ the unix
admins unless splunk or similar is being used), etc.
Thanks,
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
