"Guillaume Smet" <guillaume.smet@gmail.com> writes:
> It was my first idea but I didn't propose it as it's really a
> different thing IMHO. enable_* variables don't change the way
> PostgreSQL really does the job as synchronize_scans (or whatever the
> name will be) does.
> And it's not very consistent with the other GUC variables (most of
> them could have "enable" in their name) but we limited the usage of
> enable_* to planner variables. I don't know if it's on purpose though.
Yeah, it is a more or less deliberate policy to use enable_ only for
planner control variables, which this one certainly isn't. I seem
to recall an argument also that prefixing enable_ is just noise; it
doesn't add anything to your understanding of what the variable does.
So far I think "synchronize_seqscans" is the best proposal.
regards, tom lane
