On 21 March 2013 18:27, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > This may be true, but so what? We don't generally restrict changing > GUC settings on the grounds that people probably won't wish to do so > because it isn't useful. We restrict it in situations where it is not > technically possible or is liable to be harmful. > > I'm of the opinion that we should try to keep as many things > PGC_USERSET as we possibly can. It makes life easier for DBAs.
Only one setting will be best for the whole cluster, so neither the user nor the DBA gains if a user sets this to a different value than the one that has been determined to be optimal. Since we wait while holding the lock it is actually harmful to everyone if anybody sets a stupid value and might even be considered a denial of service attack. So there is a very good reason to make this SIGHUP, not just a whim. -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
