Previously, gen_guc_tables.pl would emit "Use of uninitialized value"
warnings if required fields were missing in guc_parameters.dat (for
example, when an integer or real GUC omitted the 'max' value). The
resulting error messages were unclear and did not identify which GUC
entry was problematic.
Add explicit validation of required fields depending on the parameter
type, and fail with a clear and specific message such as:
guc_parameters.dat:1909: error: entry "max_index_keys" of type "int" is missing required field "max"
No changes to generated guc_tables.c.
Author: Chao Li <lic@highgo.com>
Reviewed-by: Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker <ilmari@ilmari.org>
Reviewed-by: Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/CAEoWx2%3DoP4LgHi771_OKhPPUS7B-CTqCs%3D%3DuQcNXWrwBoAm5Vg%40mail.gmail.com
The order in this list was previously pretty random and had grown
organically over time. This made it unnecessarily cumbersome to
maintain these lists, as there was no clear guidelines about where to
put new entries. Also, after the merger of the type-specific GUC
structs, the list still reflected the previous type-specific
super-order.
By using alphabetical order, the place for new entries becomes clear,
and often related entries will be listed close together.
This patch reorders the existing entries in guc_parameters.dat, and it
also augments the generation script to error if an entry is found at
the wrong place.
Note: The order is actually checked after lower-casing, to handle the
likes of "DateStyle".
Reviewed-by: John Naylor <johncnaylorls@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@kurilemu.de>
Reviewed-by: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/8fdfb91e-60fb-44fa-8df6-f5dea47353c9@eisentraut.org
Instead of having five separate GUC structs, one for each type, with
the generic part contained in each of them, flip it around and have
one common struct, with the type-specific part has a subfield.
The very original GUC design had type-specific structs and
type-specific lists, and the membership in one of the lists defined
the type. But now the structs themselves know the type (from the
.vartype field), and they are all loaded into a common hash table at
run time, and so this original separation no longer makes sense. It
creates a bunch of inconsistencies in the code about whether the
type-specific or the generic struct is the primary struct, and a lot
of casting in between, which makes certain assumptions about the
struct layouts.
After the change, all these casts are gone and all the data is
accessed via normal field references. Also, various code is
simplified because only one kind of struct needs to be processed.
Reviewed-by: Chao Li <li.evan.chao@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/8fdfb91e-60fb-44fa-8df6-f5dea47353c9@eisentraut.org
Store the information in guc_tables.c in a .dat file similar to the
catalog data in src/include/catalog/, and generate a part of
guc_tables.c from that. The goal is to make it easier to edit that
information, and to be able to make changes to the downstream data
structures more easily. (Essentially, those are the same reasons as
for the original adoption of the .dat format.)
Reviewed-by: John Naylor <johncnaylorls@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>
Reviewed-by: David E. Wheeler <david@justatheory.com>
Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/dae6fe89-1e0c-4c3f-8d92-19d23374fb10%40eisentraut.org
