On Mon, 07 Dec 2009 20:20:45 -0500 Tom Lane wrote: > Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > > If we do need to do this, perhaps we should change the older parameter > > to be partition_exclusion. > > Yeah, if we do want to do something about this then changing the name of > the existing GUC would be a lot less work. However, partition_exclusion > seems to imply that it *only* applies to partitioned tables, which is > not the case...
It is less coding work - but it will for sure confuse the users. Bye -- Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum German PostgreSQL User Group European PostgreSQL User Group - Board of Directors Volunteer Regional Contact, Germany - PostgreSQL Project -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers