On 11/1/17 14:02, Nico Williams wrote: > There already _is_ a two-argument form of current_setting() that yours > somewhat conflicts with: > > current_setting(setting_name [, missing_ok ]) > > https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/functions-admin.html > > I often use > > coalesce(current_setting(setting_name, true), default_value_here) > > as an implementation of current_setting() with a default value.
That appears to address this use case then. Do we need the new proposed variant still? -- Peter Eisentraut 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
