On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 07:39:25PM -0400, Greg Smith wrote:
> I do not disagree with you fundamentally here: this *is* worth
> refining further, for sure, and the gains might be even greater if
> that keeps going. My guess is just that the Postgres community
> would not get a net benefit chasing that as a GUC in 9.4, not by the
> time you try to account for all the future overhead and risk that
> adds to the release. That was Heikki's gut feel on this when he
> yanked it out already; I was mainly trying to do sanity checking on
> that. You've made a good case that wasn't the ideal answer. Even
> with that new data, I still don't think it was a outright bad
> decision though--especially not in an October where there's no new
> version out yet. This thread spun out of Open Items, and cutting
> complexity should be the preferred direction for everything left on
> there now.
Agreeed. Also, reality check --- we can't change postgresql.conf easily
without an initdb, and I think our last 9.4 initdb is going to be
9.4beta3, which is going to be packaged on Monday.
-- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
+ Everyone has their own god. +
