On Fri, 2002-08-16 at 09:51, Ross J. Reedstrom wrote: > On Fri, Aug 16, 2002 at 10:21:12AM -0400, Vince Vielhaber wrote: > > > RPMs aren't a good enough reason to put it in. All features aren't > > installed in an RPM, why would this need to? Besides, anything that > > is runtime configurable can end up getting its default changed on a > > whim. Then again as long as 7.2.1 is stable enough for me there's > > no reason to upgrade 'cuze I damn sure ain't going back and changing > > all sorts of programs and scripts that have global users. > > So, Vince, do you have problems with the various GUC based optimizer > hooks getting set to other than the default? I'd think you'd notice > if suddenly indexscans all went away, or any of these: > > #enable_seqscan = true > #enable_indexscan = true > #enable_tidscan = true > #enable_sort = true > #enable_nestloop = true > #enable_mergejoin = true > #enable_hashjoin = true > > My point is that your resistance to a GUC controlled runtime configurable > on the basis of 'it might get changed accidently' makes little sense to > me, given all the other runtime config settings that never do get changed. > What makes you think this one will be more susceptible to accidental > flipping? > > I'm not sure who's 'whim' it is that your afraid of: perhaps you have a > paticularly sadistic DBA to deal with? ;-) And of course, this being > free software and all, noone is forcing an upgrade on you. AND, I thought the general consensus was **AWAY** from configure time directives and to GUC variables whenever **POSSIBLE**.
LER -- Larry Rosenman http://www.lerctr.org/~ler Phone: +1 972-414-9812 E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] US Mail: 1905 Steamboat Springs Drive, Garland, TX 75044-6749 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
