Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.183])
	by developer.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 972042E0039
	for <pgsql-hackers-postgresql.org@developer.postgresql.org>;
	Fri,  6 Jun 2008 18:11:02 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from developer.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71])
	by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 99562-09
	for <pgsql-hackers-postgresql.org@developer.postgresql.org>;
	Fri,  6 Jun 2008 18:10:54 -0300 (ADT)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from oxford.xeocode.com (87-127-95-198.no-dns-yet.enta.net
	[87.127.95.198])
	by developer.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4635E2E0038
	for <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>;
	Fri,  6 Jun 2008 18:10:57 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=oxford.xeocode.com)
	by oxford.xeocode.com with esmtp (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <stark@enterprisedb.com>)
	id 1K4jD4-0001Z2-1U; Fri, 06 Jun 2008 22:10:54 +0100
To: "Greg Smith" <gsmith@gregsmith.com>
Cc: "Tom Lane" <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>,  <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Overhauling GUCS
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.64.0806061524140.7804@westnet.com> (Greg Smith's
	message of "Fri\, 6 Jun 2008 16\:30\:33 -0400 \(EDT\)")
User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.1 (gnu/linux)
X-Draft-From: ("nnimap+mail01.enterprisedb.com:INBOX.hackers" 23128)
References: <Pine.GSO.4.64.0806041045520.2258@westnet.com>
	<29525.1212613052@sss.pgh.pa.us> <48472E47.7030701@dunslane.net>
	<Pine.GSO.4.64.0806042033120.3874@westnet.com>
	<20080605162400.GF16502@alvh.no-ip.org>
	<48481CBF.6040602@enterprisedb.com> <48481E3A.4010306@hagander.net>
	<Pine.GSO.4.64.0806051321360.27711@westnet.com>
	<20080605174209.GL16502@alvh.no-ip.org>
	<Pine.GSO.4.64.0806051452480.27254@westnet.com>
	<20080605212129.GI14498@yugib.highrise.ca>
	<Pine.GSO.4.64.0806051725550.10475@westnet.com>
	<3F927D52-A0FD-4575-8D24-F0F70C459235@kineticode.com>
	<4848FAA6.8000903@pse-consulting.de>
	<87ej7aeuqx.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com>
	<4849137C.3040008@pse-consulting.de>
	<877id2erp6.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com>
	<48492356.4040506@pse-consulting.de> <1618.1212765176@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<Pine.GSO.4.64.0806061524140.7804@westnet.com>
From: Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com>
Organization: EnterpriseDB
Date: Fri, 06 Jun 2008 22:10:53 +0100
Message-ID: <87d4muclr6.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1
X-Archive-Number: 200806/324
X-Sequence-Number: 119437

"Greg Smith" <gsmith@gregsmith.com> writes:

> 1) Is it worthwhile to expand the information stored in the GUC structure to
> make it better capable of supporting machine generation and to provide more
> information for tool authors via pg_settings?  The exact fields that should or
> shouldn't be included remains controversial; consider "default value",
> "per-session/runtime/restart", and "enum lists" as the list of things that are
> most needed there.

Isn't that a list of what's *already* there?

-- 
  Gregory Stark
  EnterpriseDB          http://www.enterprisedb.com
  Ask me about EnterpriseDB's PostGIS support!