Pavel Stehule <pavel.steh...@gmail.com> writes: > The bad performance is not the main reason for implementing session > variables (and in almost all cases the performance of GUC is not a problem, > because it is not a bottleneck, and in some terrible cases, I can save the > GUC to a variable). There are other differences:
Well, yeah, the schema-variables patch offers a bunch of other features. What I'm not sure about is whether there's actually much field demand for those. I think if we fix guc.c's performance issues and add some simple features on top of that, like the ability to declare bool, int, float data types not just string for a user-defined GUC, we'd have exactly what a lot of people want --- not least because it'd be upwards-compatible with what they are already doing. However, that's probably a debate to have on the other thread not here. This patch doesn't foreclose pushing forward with the schema-variables patch, if people want that. regards, tom lane