Euler Taveira de Oliveira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> +1. If we go with 'enable_sync_seqcans' for 8.3, and in a future release
> cycle we do test the cases Simon described above and we agree we need to
> do a fine tune to benefit from this feature, we will need to deprecate
> 'enable_sync_seqscans' and invent another one (sync_seqscans_threshold).
> Looking at this perpective, IMHO we should go with the number (0.25)
> instead of the boolean.
Surely the risk-of-needing-to-deprecate argument applies ten times more
strongly to a number than a boolean.
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
