Re: proposal: a validator for configuration files

On Jun16, 2011, at 20:14 , Alexey Klyukin wrote:
> On Jun 16, 2011, at 8:01 PM, Florian Pflug wrote:
>> On Jun16, 2011, at 18:46 , Alexey Klyukin wrote:
>>> I just recalled a reason for counting the total number of errors. There is a condition that
>>> checks that the total number of errors is less than 100 and bails out if it's more than that
>>> (100 is arbitrary). The reason is to avoid bloating the logs w/ something totally unrelated
>>> to postgresql.conf. That was suggested by Tom Lane here:
>>> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2009-03/msg01142.php
>> 
>> Ah, right, I missed that. Guess it'll have to stay a counter, then. Still, I don't think it's
>> worth the effort to make the count correct in case of included files, so I'd say just add
>> a comment explaining that the count isn't totally accurate.
> 
> Well, while thinking about this I decided to leave the counter for the ParseConfigFp, but 
> drop it in ProcessConfigFile. The case we are protecting against is a single file full of junk.
> It's unlikely that this junk would contain include directives with valid file paths, neither it's
> likely to find a file with a correct syntax, but full of invalid directives.

Sounds good.

best regards,
Florian Pflug