Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> >>> How about sending an INFO or special taged message to the client when
> >>> there is a GUC change, and have report_changes as a GUC variable that
> >>> controls it?
> >>
> >> Having such a variable would break the client libraries that need the
> >> information. They won't stop needing the info just because some DBA
> >> thinks it's a good idea to save a few bytes of bandwidth ...
>
> > You could configure it so once it is set by the client, only the client
> > can change it, meaning it doesn't read from postgresql.conf.
>
> I'm not seeing the point, though. The amount of bandwidth involved is
> insignificant, so there's no value in turning it off. AFAICT Peter's
> objection to adding this is complexity, not bandwidth --- and adding a
> control knob as you suggest will only make it even more complex.
My basic idea was using INFO-like message to send the SET change
information.
-- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610)
359-1001+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square,
Pennsylvania19073