st 5. 4. 2023 v 15:56 odesílatel Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> napsal:
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes: > On Tue, Apr 4, 2023 at 12:42 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> Basically, I want to reject this on the grounds that it's not >> useful enough to justify the overhead of marking the "role" GUC >> as GUC_REPORT.
> I agree with that. I think we need some method for optionally > reporting values, so that stuff like this can be handled without > adding it to the wire protocol for everyone.
It could probably be possible to provide some mechanism for setting GUC_REPORT on specific variables locally within sessions. I don't think this'd be much of a protocol-break problem, because clients should already be coded to deal gracefully with ParameterStatus messages for variables they don't know. However, connecting that up to something like a psql prompt feature would still be annoying. I doubt I'd want to go as far as having psql try to turn on GUC_REPORT automatically if it sees %N in the prompt ...