We don't need per guc locking. This is the whole objection Tom had about this patch being more complex than it has to be.
-- greg On 1 Aug 2013 14:55, "Dimitri Fontaine" <dimi...@2ndquadrant.fr> wrote: > Greg Stark <st...@mit.edu> writes: > > I think people are going to laugh at us if an open source database > > software can't manage a simple flat file database of settings, > > especially one that is purely write-only and can be a simple dump of > > settings that are set by alter system. > > So you say it's easier to implement per-GUC locking semantics correctly > when using a single file with multiple units of information that all are > of the same type? Interesting. > > Maybe the storage should actually be a shared catalog, in fact. > > Regards, > -- > Dimitri Fontaine > http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support > > > -- > Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers >
