Re: PGC_S_DEFAULT is inadequate

On tis, 2011-05-10 at 22:20 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> My conclusion about all this is that we really need to invent another
> GucSource value falling between PGC_S_DEFAULT and PGC_S_ENV_VAR,
> called perhaps PGC_S_DYNAMIC_DEFAULT, for the purpose of denoting
> values that are defaults in terms of the precedence pecking order but
> are not simply the hard-wired boot values.  There's no real need for
> clients to see the difference, so we could have the external
> representation in pg_settings be "default" for both, but guc.c really
> needs to be aware of which settings are truly boot values and which
> are not.
> 
> Comments?

Makes a lot of sense.