On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 7:52 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:

> Magnus Hagander <mag...@hagander.net> writes:
> > Here's another attempt at moving this one forward. Basically this adds a
> > new GucSource being GUC_S_CLIENT_EARLY. It now runs through the
> parameters
> > once before CheckMyDatabase, with source set to GUC_S_CLIENT_EARLY. In
> this
> > source, *only* parameters that are flagged as GUC_ALLOW_EARLY will be
> set,
> > any other parameters are ignored (without error). For now, only the
> > ignore_connection_restriction is allowed at this stage. Then it runs
> > CheckMyDatabase(), and after that it runs through all the parameters
> again,
> > now with the GUC_S_CLIENT source as usual, which will now process all
> > other  variables.
> Ick.  This is an improvement over the other way of attacking the problem?
> I do not think so.

Nope, I'm far from sure that it is. I just wanted to show what it'd look

I personally think the second patch (the one adding a parameter to
BackendWorkerInitializeConnection) is the cleanest one. It doesn't solve
Andres' problem, but perhaps that should be the job of a different patch.

 Magnus Hagander
 Me: https://www.hagander.net/ <http://www.hagander.net/>
 Work: https://www.redpill-linpro.com/ <http://www.redpill-linpro.com/>

Reply via email to