On 2020-07-02 17:25, James Coleman wrote:
> I think the change makes a lot of sense. The only reason I had it as
> enable_incrementalsort in the first place was trying to broadly
> following the existing GUC names, but as has already been pointed out,
> there's a lot of variation there, and my version of the patch already
> changed it to be more readable (at one point it was
> enable_incsort...which is short...but does not have an obvious
> meaning).
>
> I've attached a patch to make the change,
committed
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
