Horton

Re: File-per-GUC WAS: Re: ALTER SYSTEM SET command to change postgresql.conf parameters (RE: Proposal for Allow postgresql.conf values to be changed via SQL [review])

Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>
To: Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>, Greg Stark <stark@mit.edu>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila@huawei.com>, Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri@2ndquadrant.fr>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2013-08-06T14:54:22Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
* Andres Freund (andres@2ndquadrant.com) wrote:
> I don't think we're designing a feature that's supposed to be used under
> heavy concurrency here. If you have users/tools doing conflicting
> actions as superusers you need to solve that by social means, not by
> technical ones.

If this actually gets used by puppet or another CMS, the chances of the
'social means' being successful drop drastically.

I agree that it doesn't need to work under heavy concurrency, but it
should do something sensible if it happens- perhaps even just throwing
an error if it can't acquire the lock immediately, warning the user that
some other process is trying to modify the config concurrently.

	Thanks,

		Stephen