On 10/18/2016 01:28 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 4:18 PM, Josh Berkus <j...@agliodbs.com> wrote: >> On 10/12/2016 05:00 PM, Robert Haas wrote: >>> On Sun, Oct 9, 2016 at 9:51 PM, Josh Berkus <j...@agliodbs.com> wrote: >>>> Given that hot_standby_feedback is pretty bulletproof now, and a lot of >>>> the work in reducing replay conflicts, I think the utility of >>>> vacuum_defer_cleanup_age is at an end. I really meant so submit a patch >>>> to remove it to 9.6, but it got away from me. >>>> >>>> Any objections to removing the option in 10? >>> >>> I'm not sure I see the point. >> >> Redusing the number of configuration variables is an a-priori good. In >> aggregate, the more knobs we have, the harder it is to learn how to >> admin Postgres. Therefore any time a config variable becomes obsolete, >> we should remove it. > > Meh. I agree that more configuration knobs makes it harder to learn > to configure the system, but we've got enough of them that removing > exactly one isn't going to make a material difference. Against that, > if you are wrong about it being obsolete and there are actually people > relying on it heavily, those people will be very sad if we remove it, > and unless they read this mailing list, we probably won't find out > until it's too late.
Based on that argument, we would never be able to remove any configuration parameter ever. -- -- Josh Berkus Red Hat OSAS (any opinions are my own) -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers