[postgis-devel] GUC, anyone ?
strk at keybit.net
Wed Dec 21 09:53:04 PST 2011
On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 09:17:27AM -0800, Paul Ramsey wrote:
> Right, my favourite GUC was output precision. It's a hard call, since
> anything which is a GUC could also be a function parameter instead...
> so there's a philosophy to it.
Well, consider AsGML.
Is there any philosopher loving the current parameters set ?
Precision is a good candidate.
IMHO parameters would override defaults, which would be driven
Of course SQL-defined defaults (those defined by DEFAULT=xxy) won't work
nicely this way. We'd need the multi-signature way of doing defaults instead,
which we recently kind of got rid of.
Another way would be SQL-defined defaults being NULL, function being
non-strict and implementations using GUC defaults on NULL.
Output precision seems a good candidate to me for an experimental GUC.
| __/ | Thank you for PostGIS-2.0 Topology !
| / 2.0 | http://www.pledgebank.com/postgistopology
More information about the postgis-devel