On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 11:16 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: >> Yeah. custom_variable_classes is a pretty annoying wart, but if it's >> set to the default value (namely, empty) then it actually does prevent >> people from setting bajillions of completely pointless settings, which >> seems like it has some merit. I'm not sure it has enough merit to >> justify keeping it around, but it has more than none. We could allow >> entering a date of February 31st, too, but we don't. > > Well, that argument was essentially why we put it in to begin with. > But I think pretty much everybody agrees that it's more trouble than > it's worth (in fact, weren't you one of the people complaining about > it?)
Well, yes. But I was arguing that we should replace the leaky dam with one that's watertight, rather than demolishing the dam. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
