"Kevin Grittner"  wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
>> I agree it's a bug that you can do what Kevin's example shows.
> I'll look at it and see if I can pull together a patch.
Basically, if a GUC has a check function, this patch causes it to be
run on a RESET just like it is on a SET, to make sure that the
resulting value is valid to set within the context.  Some messages
needed adjustment.  While I was there, I made cod a little more
consistent among related GUCs.
I also added a little to the regression tests to cover this.

Attachment: check-reset-v1.patch
Description: Binary data

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to