* Amit Kapila (amit.kapil...@gmail.com) wrote: > Do you mean to say, that when user uses ALTER SYSTEM and include is > disabled, then we can give ERROR in > ALTER SYSTEM, that to reflect the values, he need to enable it? > Actually in previous version of patch, there was WARNING on such a > condition. > I agree that it can be detected and we issue Warning or Error, but > I think it will be an un-necessary inconvenience > for user. However if you still vote for disable by default, I will > modify the patch that way only.
It hardly seems unnecessary.. Otherwise we accept a command that won't
actually do anything, yes? We usually notice or warn, at least, on such
cases (see similar things around GRANT/REVOKE...).
> The other part which needs suggestions is about un-safe parameters:
> I think for first version of feature, we can decide on some minimum
> list of parameters that will be considere un-safe and user will not be
> allowed to modify them with ALTER SYSTEM.
I do feel like it's easier to add things to the 'allowed' set later,
should we see some good justification for it, than to disallow things
already allowed.
> To start with we can consider below 4 parameters in that category and
> later on keep adding more parameters:
> data_directory, listen_addresses, port, shared_buffers.
What about include directives?
Thanks,
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
