On Oct 19, 2014 4:34 AM, "Robert Haas" <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > But TBH I suspect 95% of the problems here would vanish if smart > > shutdown weren't the default ... > > But for your repeated objections, we would have changed the default to fast years ago. AFAICT everyone else is in favor of that. >
Yes, most others even seemed more than happy to change the behaviour of smart to be that of fast, and rename the old "smart" method to "silly". no, that's not something I'd recommend, for compatibility reasons, but definitely +<all current quota> to not have the silly be the default.. /Magnus
