Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> pgman wrote:
>> Is enable_constraint_exclusion the proper name for this feature? I know
>> we have enable* in the optimizer settings, but that naming seems
>> unfortunate in that we should have just called it hash_join and it could
>> be enabled/disabled.
>>
>> I am thinking we should just call it constraint_exclusion.
> So, given the silence on this, I assume people think we should rename
> this before beta starts.
Or that they think it might as well be left alone. I would like to
think that the parameter will have a very finite lifespan anyway;
if it's still there in 8.2, it'll be because we didn't get cached
plan updating done, and I hope that will not be the case.
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
