On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 07:49:42PM -0700, David G. Johnston wrote: > On Wednesday, May 2, 2018, Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > > Robert Haas wrote: > > On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 9:28 AM, Alvaro Herrera > <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> > wrote: > > > I admit I am more concerned about the possibility of bugs than I am > > > about providing a performance-related tool. > > > > I agree that if partition pruning has bugs, somebody might want to > > turn it off. On the other hand, when they do, there's a good chance > > that they will lose so much performance that they'll still be pretty > > sad. Somebody certainly could have a workload where the pruning > > helps, but by a small enough amount that shutting it off is > > acceptable. But I suspect that's a somewhat narrow target. > > > > I'm not going to go to war over this, though. I'm just telling you > > what I think. > > Well, we didn't have a GUC initially, evidently because none of us > thought that this would be a huge problem. So maybe you're both right > and it's overkill to have it. I'm not set on having it, either. Does > anybody else have an opinion? > > > I toss my +1 to removing it altogether.
+1 We are terrible at removing old GUCs and having it around means everyone has to decide if they need to change it, so having it is not a zero cost. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. + + Ancient Roman grave inscription +
