On 12/23/2015 04:37 PM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 24, 2015 at 2:08 AM, Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com> wrote:
>> On 12/23/2015 05:45 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
>>>> Yeah, the last version of the patch dates of August, and there is
>>>> visibly agreement that the information of pg_controldata provided at
>>>> SQL level is useful while the data of pg_config is proving to be less
>>>> interesting for remote users. Could the patch be rebased and split as
>>>> suggested above?
>>>
>>> I am marking this patch as returned with feedback, there is not much activity...
>>
>> I just dusted this off yesterday finally. Anyway, based on the
>> discussions I plan to:
>>
>> 1) split it into two separate patches, one for pg_config and one for
>> pg_controldata.
>> 2) Change the pg_controldata to be a bunch of separate functions as
>> suggested by Josh Berkus rather than one SRF.
>
> This looks like a plan, thanks!
First installment -- pg_config function/view as a separate patch,
rebased to current master.
Joe
--
Crunchy Data - http://crunchydata.com
PostgreSQL Support for Secure Enterprises
Consulting, Training, & Open Source Development