On Thursday, June 12, 2014, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > David G Johnston <david.g.johns...@gmail.com <javascript:;>> writes: > > On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 10:42 AM, Tom Lane-2 [via PostgreSQL] < > > ml-node+s1045698n5807014...@n5.nabble.com <javascript:;>> wrote: > >> I wonder if we should round fractions up instead of down in that logic? > >> It might be less surprising for those GUCs where zero is special, and > >> it seems like about a wash for most others. > > > I think documenting the behavior better, > > I don't. If you have to explain it, it probably needs improvement.
No argument with the philosophy. > > > Green field maybe I'd say yes but given that the new behavior could turn > > features on that are currently off it doesn't seem to be beneficial > enough > > to warrant changing. > > I don't think that argument holds water either. We routinely make > changes that break old postgresql.conf files. Not in minor updates > of course, but none of this is material for back-patching. > Then I'd pick throwing an error if a floating point value is assigned to a parameter that is defined to accept integer. I'd rather actually break the file and not silently redefine its contents. David J.
