On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 04:33:39PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Nathan Bossart <nathandboss...@gmail.com> writes: >> On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 03:12:42PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: >>> But if there's even one use case where adjusting GUCs at this phase is >>> reasonable, then 0003 isn't really good enough. We need an 0004 that >>> provides a new hook in a place where such changes can safely be made. > >> I think that is doable. IMO it should be Ń•omething like _PG_change_GUCs() >> that is called before _PG_init(). The other option is to add a hook called >> after _PG_init() where MaxBackends is available (in which case we likely >> want GetMaxBackends() again). Thoughts? > > I like the second option. Calling into a module before we've called its > _PG_init function is just weird, and will cause no end of confusion.
Alright. I think that is basically what Julien recommended a few weeks ago [0]. Besides possibly reintroducing GetMaxBackends(), we might also want to block SetConfigOption() when called in this new hook. [0] https://postgr.es/m/20220325031146.cd23gaak5qlzdy6l%40jrouhaud -- Nathan Bossart Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
