Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I don't think we ever discussed it, but it seemed logical and a minimal
> change to the code.  We already have a GUC write of non-default values
> for exec and no one had issues with that.

You can hardly claim that "no one had issues with that".  I complained
about it and I think other people did too.  It's a messy, ugly approach;
moreover we have no field experience that says it's reliable.

It may be the least messy, ugly approach available, but I concur with
Neil's wish to at least look for other answers.

                        regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings

Reply via email to