Date: Sun, 6 Feb 2022 21:04:14 -0600
From: Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com>,
	Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com>,
	pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org, bruce@momjian.us,
	tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us
Subject: Re: GUC flags
Message-ID: <20220207030414.GC31460@telsasoft.com>
References: <YfCb03sRzkgNVwbL@paquier.xyz>
 <20220126034426.GN23027@telsasoft.com>
 <YfDqSVZlzdzZO9x6@paquier.xyz>
 <20220128043621.GA23027@telsasoft.com>
 <YfTg/WHNLVVygy8v@paquier.xyz>
 <20220130001849.GR23027@telsasoft.com>
 <Yfdw9WWJ/BMl7QYd@paquier.xyz>
 <20220131225645.GZ23027@telsasoft.com>
 <Yf9YGSwPiMu0c7fP@paquier.xyz>
 <YgCGjDK/b13shS0o@paquier.xyz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <YgCGjDK/b13shS0o@paquier.xyz>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28)
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20220207030414.GC31460%40telsasoft.com>
Precedence: bulk

Thanks for working on it.

Your test is checking that stuff in sample.conf is actually a GUC and not
marked NOT_IN_SAMPLE.  But those are both unlikely mistakes to make.

The important/interesting test is the opposite: that all GUCs are present in
the sample file.  It's a lot easier for someone to forget to add a GUC to
sample.conf than it is for someone to accidentally add something that isn't a
GUC.

I'd first parse the GUC-like lines in the file, making a list of gucs_in_file
and then compare the two lists.

-- 
Justin