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 (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to