Greetings, * Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote: > Peter Geoghegan <p...@bowt.ie> writes: > > It now seems likely that the hash_mem/hash_mem_multiplier proposal has > > the support it needs to get into Postgres 13. Assuming that the > > proposal doesn't lose momentum, then it's about time to return to the > > original question you posed at the start of the thread: > > > What should we do with the hashagg_avoid_disk_plan GUC (formerly known > > as the enable_hashagg_disk GUC), if anything? > > > I myself think that there is a case to be made for removing it > > entirely. > > +0.5 or so for removing it. It seems too confusing and dubiously > useful.
I agree that it shouldn't exist. Thanks, Stephen
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
