On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 12:14 PM, Greg Clough wrote:
> Many thanks for the quick consideration, even if it's ultimately a rejection.
> Figuring out some SQL that will work across all platforms, versions, and
> compile-time options will be "fun", but I'm up for a challenge.
Why would you need d
>> On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 10:11 AM, Andrew Dunstan
>> wrote:
>>> He's proposing an extra column to show the actual value used, so
>>> distinguishing them should be a problem.
>
>> For most settings, that column would just be a duplicate. For a
>> handful, it would pull in the value of some other
On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 10:22 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Personally, what I'd rather do is try to get rid of GUC behaviors like
> "the effective value depends on something else". But convenience and
> backwards compatibility may be arguments against that.
Yeah. The dependency between various GUCs is
Robert Haas writes:
> On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 10:11 AM, Andrew Dunstan
> wrote:
>> He's proposing an extra column to show the actual value used, so
>> distinguishing them should be a problem.
> For most settings, that column would just be a duplicate. For a
> handful, it would pull in the value
On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 10:11 AM, Andrew Dunstan
wrote:
> He's proposing an extra column to show the actual value used, so
> distinguishing them should be a problem.
For most settings, that column would just be a duplicate. For a
handful, it would pull in the value of some other GUC. If somebod
On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 9:58 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Greg Clough writes:
>> I would like to propose that we expose the "active" value of parameters in
>> pg_settings, instead of "-1". In this example below, when it's set to "-1"
>> I need to know that autovacuum_work_mem is related to the settin
Greg Clough writes:
> I would like to propose that we expose the "active" value of parameters in
> pg_settings, instead of "-1". In this example below, when it's set to "-1" I
> need to know that autovacuum_work_mem is related to the setting of
> maintenance_work_mem, so that I can determine t
Hi Hackers,
I would like to propose that we expose the "active" value of parameters in
pg_settings, instead of "-1". In this example below, when it's set to "-1" I
need to know that autovacuum_work_mem is related to the setting of
maintenance_work_mem, so that I can determine that the actual s
