To: Greg Smith <gsmith@gregsmith.com>
cc: Michael Nacos <m.nacos@gmail.com>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Overhauling GUCS 
In-reply-to: <Pine.GSO.4.64.0808171610220.22642@westnet.com> 
References: <7473.1212625397@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<200807161530.m6GFUNY28751@momjian.us>
	<407fa4640808130738s3537ca45j22322a5eb70f9173@mail.gmail.com>
	<Pine.GSO.4.64.0808171610220.22642@westnet.com>
Comments: In-reply-to Greg Smith <gsmith@gregsmith.com>
	message dated "Sun, 17 Aug 2008 16:48:20 -0400"
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2008 17:18:55 -0400
Message-ID: <26969.1219007935@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>

Greg Smith <gsmith@gregsmith.com> writes:
> Josh Berkus and I have been exchanging some ideas for the GUC internals 
> overhaul and had a quick discussion about that in person last month. 
> We've been gravitating toward putting all the extra information we'd like 
> to push into there in an extra catalog table (pg_settings_info or 
> something).  The stuff the server needs to start can stay right where it 
> is right now, all the other decoration can move to the table.

Somehow, the attraction of that idea escapes me.

What we have now was named Grand Unified Configuration for a reason:
it centralized the handling of what had been a mess of different things
configured in different ways.  I'm not eager to go backwards on that.

I'm also interested to know exactly what such a table would provide
that isn't already available in the form of the pg_settings view.

			regards, tom lane