Greetings,
* Tom Lane (tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
> Peter Geoghegan <pg@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