Horton

Re: Proposal for Allow postgresql.conf values to be changed via SQL [review]

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
To: Amit Kapila <amit.kapila@huawei.com>
Cc: 'Greg Smith' <greg@2ndQuadrant.com>, 'Robert Haas' <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, 'Greg Stark' <stark@mit.edu>, 'Andres Freund' <andres@2ndquadrant.com>, 'Boszormenyi Zoltan' <zb@cybertec.at>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2013-03-22T14:02:45Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
Amit Kapila escribió:
> On Friday, March 22, 2013 8:57 AM Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > Amit Kapila escribió:

> > > I think adding new syntax change is little scary for me, not for
> > > the matter of implementation but for building consensus on syntax.
> > 
> > I cannot but agree on that point.
> 
> Sorry, I don't get your point. 
> Do you mean to say that you don't agree with me and want new syntax as
> proposed by you to be implemented?

On the contrary, I was saying I agree with you on the difficulty on
getting consensus on this.

I don't know where I learned this phrase or even if it's in common
usage.  After a not-so-quick search I see it explained here:
http://www.perfectyourenglish.com/usage/but.htm

-- 
Álvaro Herrera                http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services