On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 12:19 PM, Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@commandprompt.com> wrote: > Euler Taveira is arguing in an autovacuum thread that we should give > "storage parameters" a different name; his argument is that > "autovacuum_enabled" is not really a parameter that relates to storage. > He is proposing "relation parameters". > > I am against the idea of renaming them, for two reasons: 1. it's a > user-visible change that doesn't seem to buy a lot; 2. it's a tedious > patch to write. > > Can I get some votes? If you think they should be renamed but to a > different name than "relation parameters", please state what that is > too.
-1. Even if this is a good idea in general, it's a bad idea right now, because we're trying to get 8.4 beta out the door. I also don't see that the name storage parameters is all that terrible. Surely the purpose of autovacuum is allow reuse of storage space, no? ...Robert -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
