Andres Freund wrote: > On 2015-09-08 07:06:04 +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote: > > 2015-09-07 21:44 GMT+02:00 Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de>: > > > The spellings for boolean values were a relatively small subset of what > > > the backend accepts - it's now on,off,true,false,yes,no,1,0. I'm not > > > sure whether that's a good idea. Comments? > > > > if somebody prefer true, false, and we will support only on, off, then the > > tabcomplete will not be too user friendly :( > > > > "1, 0" can be out - but other? > > After sleeping on it I think we should keep all of them - they'll show > for lots of "boolean like" GUCs (e.g. constraint_exclusion, sync_commit, > huge_pages) so not showing them for booleans just seems > inconsisten. Unless somebody protests pdq I'll push it that way.
Yeah, seems fine to list the whole lot. -- Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, 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
