On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 6:42 AM Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 9:33 PM David G. Johnston > <david.g.johns...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I'm not seeing enough similarity with the reasons for, and specific > behaviors, of those previous GUCs to dismiss this proposal on that basis > alone. These are "crap we messed things up" switches that alter a query > behind the scenes in ways that a user cannot do through SQL - they simply > provide for changing a default that we already allow the user to override > per-query. Its akin to "DateStyle" and its pure cosmetic influencing > ease-of-use option rather than some changing the fundamental structural > meaning of '\n' > > Well, I think it's usually worse to have two possible behaviors rather > than one. Like, a lot of people have probably made the mistake of > running EXPLAIN ANALYZE without realizing that it's actually running > the query, and then been surprised or dismayed afterwards. This really belongs on the other thread (though I basically said the same thing there two days ago): The ANALYZE option should not be part of the GUC setup. None of the other EXPLAIN default changing options have the same issues with being on by default - which is basically what we are talking about here: being able to have an option be on without specifying that option in the command itself. TIMING already does this without difficulty and the others are no different. David J.