On 2014-01-02 08:26:20 -0200, Fabrízio de Royes Mello wrote: > On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 7:19 AM, Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com> > wrote: > > > > On 2013-12-31 13:37:59 +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote: > > > > We use the namespace "ext" to the internal code > > > > (src/backend/access/common/reloptions.c) skip some validations and > store > > > > the custom GUC. > > > > > > > > Do you think we don't need to use the "ext" namespace? > > > > > > > > > > yes - there be same mechanism as we use for GUC > > > > There is no existing mechanism to handle conflicts for GUCs. The > > difference is that for GUCs nearly no "namespaced" GUCs exist (plperl, > > plpgsql have some), but postgres defines at least autovacuum. and > > toast. namespaces for relation options. > > > > autovacuum. namespace ???
Yea, right, it's autovacuum_... 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
