> From: gsst...@gmail.com [mailto:gsst...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Greg > Stark > Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2013 12:50 AM > To: Greg Smith > Cc: Amit Kapila; Andres Freund; Boszormenyi Zoltan; pgsql- > hack...@postgresql.org > Subject: Re: Re: Proposal for Allow postgresql.conf values to be > changed via SQL [review] > > On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 7:39 AM, Greg Smith <g...@2ndquadrant.com> > wrote: > > > I wasn't complaining that the change isn't instant. I understand > that can't > > be done. But I think the signal to reload should be sent. If people > > execute SET PERSISTENT, and it doesn't actually do anything until the > server > > is next restarted, they will be very surprised. It's OK if it > doesn't do > > anything for a second, or until new sessions connect, because that's > just > > how SIGHUP/session variables work. That's a documentation issue. > Not > > reloading the config at all, I think that's going to trigger a ton of > future > > support problems. > > Think also about the case where someone wants to change multiple > values together and having just some set and not others would be > inconsistent.
Do you mean to say that because some variables can only be set after restart can lead to inconsistency, or is it because of asynchronous nature of pg_reload_conf()? > I can see you're right about surprising users but is there not another > way to solve the same problem without making that impossible? With Regards, Amit Kapila. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
