Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes:
> On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 12:10 PM, Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>> Why? We do have other options with aliases for option values and all
>> other enum option has taken care not to need spaces.
> I think that's probably mostly a happy coincidence; I'm not committed
> to a policy of ensuring that all GUCs can be set to whatever value you
> want without using the space character. Besides, what's so special
> about enum GUCs? There can certainly be spaces in string-valued GUCs,
> and you're not going to be able to get around the problem there with
> one-off kludges.
Pathname GUCs can have spaces in them (that's even pretty common, on
certain platforms). Other GUCs contain SQL identifiers, which can
legally have spaces in them too. So really this is a mechanism
deficiency, not something we should work around by instituting a policy
against spaces in GUC values.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
