On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 9:38 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
>> On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 6:25 PM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> wrote:
>>> [ reasons ]
>
>> I agree with these reasons. We don't get charged $0.50 per GUC, so
>> there's no particular reason to contort things to have fewer of them.
>
> Well, there definitely is a distributed cost to each additional GUC.
> Peter's given what are probably adequate reasons to add several of them
> here, but that doesn't mean we should not ask the question whether each
> new GUC is really necessary.
No argument. I'm merely saying that I think the rationale for these
GUCs is solid enough to justify their existence.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
