Re: [HACKERS] Are we losing momentum?

Sean Chittenden <sean@chittenden.org> writes:
> 4) guc.c is now in sync with the list of available variables used for
> tab completion
>> 
>> AFAIK, the GUC variables not listed in tab-complete.c were omitted
>> deliberately.  We could have a discussion about the sensefulness of
>> those decisions, but please do not consider it a bug to be fixed
>> out-of-hand.

> Alright, there weren't many omitted GUC's, but those that were
> omitted did have counterparts that were include already so I figured
> there was some bit rot going on.

There could be some of that too.  I was just saying that it's not a
foregone conclusion to me that every parameter known to guc.c should
be in the tab completion list.

			regards, tom lane