Florian Pflug <f...@phlo.org> writes:
> On the downside, the current behaviour prevents problems if someone changes
> two interrelated GUCs, but makes a mistake at one of them. For example,
> someone might drastically lower bgwriter_delay but might botch the matching
> adjustment of bgwriter_lru_maxpages.
That's a fair point, but the current behavior only saves you if the
botch is such that the new value is detectably invalid, as opposed to
say just a factor of 100 off from what you meant. Not sure that that's
all that helpful.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
