With the patch, you can - if you wish - substitute some other number for the one the planner comes up with.
I saw you're using AccessExclusiveLock, the reason being it affects SELECTs.
That is supposed to apply when things might change the answer from a SELECT, whereas this affects only the default for a plan.
By this theory, shouldn't any other parameter like n_distinct_inherited which just effects the plan required lower lock level?
It should, yes, and I'm as surprised to see it isn't as you are.
Thread: Fabrizio was asked by Robert to provide or document an analysis of why each setting was OK to change; 9 days later he had not done so or replied, so I committed a reduced version of the patch that matched existing tests and code comments.
I guess we could have salvaged some more from it, but we didn't and there's never enough time.
If RMT allows, that can be changed or it can wait.
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
