On 2014-01-02 08:26:20 -0200, Fabrízio de Royes Mello wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 7:19 AM, Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com>
> > On 2013-12-31 13:37:59 +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> > > > We use the namespace "ext" to the internal code
> > > > (src/backend/access/common/reloptions.c) skip some validations and
> > > > the custom GUC.
> > > >
> > > > Do you think we don't need to use the "ext" namespace?
> > > >
> > >
> > > yes - there be same mechanism as we use for GUC
> > There is no existing mechanism to handle conflicts for GUCs. The
> > difference is that for GUCs nearly no "namespaced" GUCs exist (plperl,
> > plpgsql have some), but postgres defines at least autovacuum. and
> > toast. namespaces for relation options.
> autovacuum. namespace ???
Yea, right, it's autovacuum_...
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com)
To make changes to your subscription: