* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote: > > There are others where min_val is -1 for the same reason, where > > functionally the minimum is really 0. Some of us would like to see > > min_val reflect the useful minimum, period, and move all these special > > case ones out of there. That is a multi-year battle to engage in > > though, and there's little real value to the user community coming out > > of it relative to that work scope. > > The impression I had was that Stephen was thinking of actually setting > min_val to 1 (or whatever) and handling zero or -1 in some out-of-band > fashion, perhaps by adding GUC flag bits showing those as allowable > special cases. I'm not sure how we would display such a state of affairs > in pg_settings, but other than that it doesn't sound implausible.
Yes. I'm not 100% sure about how to deal with it in pg_settings, but
that is the general idea.
> We could alternatively try to split up these cases into multiple GUCs,
> which I guess is what you're imagining as a "multi-year battle". But
> personally I think any such proposal will fail on the grounds that
> it's too much compatibility loss for the value gained.
Agreed.
Thanks,
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
