"Joshua D. Drake" <j...@commandprompt.com> writes:
> On Sat, 2009-03-14 at 11:47 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> ... Aside from the implementation costs of making
>> it variable, there is the oft repeated refrain that Postgres has too
>> many configuration knobs already.
> Well that "too many knobs" argument doesn't apply to this scenario etc.
> Anyone who is making use of these need those knobs.
That's nonsense --- on that argument, any variable no matter how obscure
should be exposed as a tunable because there might be somebody somewhere
who could benefit from it. You are ignoring the costs to everybody else
who don't need it, but still have to study a GUC variable definition and
try to figure out whether it needs changing for their usage. Not to
mention the people who set it to a bad value and suffer lost performance
as a result (cf vacuum_cost_delay).
Note that I am not saying "no", I am saying "give us some evidence
*first*". The costs in implementation effort and user confusion are
certain, the benefits are not.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
