At 2024-03-26 08:11:33 -0400, robertmh...@gmail.com wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 25, 2024 at 5:04 PM Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote: > > > > Isn't "configuration" too generic a term for disabling ALTER SYSTEM? > > > > > > maybe "externally_managed_auto_config" > > > > How many people associate "auto" with ALTER SYSTEM? I assume not many. > > > > To me, externally_managed_configuration is promising a lot more than it > > delivers because there is still a lot of ocnfiguration it doesn't > > control. I am also confused why the purpose of the feature, external > > management of configuation, is part of the variable name. We usually > > name parameters for what they control. > > I actually agree with this. I wasn't going to quibble with it because > other people seemed to like it. But I think something like > allow_alter_system would be better, as it would describe the exact > thing that the parameter does, rather than how we think the parameter > ought to be used.
Yes, "externally_managed_configuration" raises far more questions than it answers. "enable_alter_system" is clearer in terms of what to expect when you set it. "enable_alter_system_command" is rather long, but even better in that it is specific enough to not promise anything about not allowing superusers to change the configuration some other way. -- Abhijit (as someone who could find a use for this feature)
