On 2013-02-25 21:13:25 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> > I propose loosening those restrictions to
> > a) allow repeatedly qualified names like a.b.c
>
> If SET allows it, I guess we can allow it here. But is a grammar change
> really all that is needed to make it work from the file?
Seems so. There's no additional validation that I could find
anywhere. And a simple test confirmed it works.
postgres=# SHOW foo.bar.blub;
foo.bar.blub
--------------
1
(1 row)
Just for reference, thats the grammar for SET/SHOW:
var_name: ColId
{ $$ = $1; }
| var_name '.' ColId
> > b) allow variables to start with a digit from the second level onwards.
>
> That seems like a seriously bad idea. I note that SET does *not* allow
> this; furthermore it seems like a considerable weakening of our ability
> to detect silly typos in config files. Nor did you offer a use-case
> to justify it.
The use-case I had in mind was
bdr.1.dsn = ...
bdr.2.dsn = ...
bdr.3.dsn = ...
bdr.4.dsn = ...
which is what I had used via -c. But I guess it can easy enough be
replaced by node_$i or something.
Any arguments whether we should try to validate -c SET/SHOW,
set_config() and -c the same?
Greetings,
Andres Freund
--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
