On Sat, Jul 18, 2020 at 11:30 AM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Jeff Davis <pg...@j-davis.com> writes: > > Yes, I think we should have that GUC (hashagg_avoid_disk_plan) for at > > least one release. > > You'e being optimistic about it being possible to remove a GUC once > we ship it. That seems to be a hard sell most of the time.
You've said that you're +0.5 on removing this GUC, while Jeff seems to be about -0.5 (at least that's my take). It's hard to see a way towards closing out the hashagg_avoid_disk_plan open item if that's our starting point. The "do we need to keep hashagg_avoid_disk_plan?" question is fundamentally a value judgement IMV. I believe that you both understand each other's perspectives. I also suspect that no pragmatic compromise will be possible -- we can either have the hashagg_avoid_disk_plan GUC or not have it. ISTM that we're deadlocked, at least in a technical or procedural sense. Does that understanding seem accurate to you both? -- Peter Geoghegan
