On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 7:48 PM Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
> We cared about such plan stability that in the past FWIW, see for
> example c588df9 as work_mem is a setting that people like to change.
> Why should this be different? work_mem is a popular configuration
> setting.
The RMT met today. We determined that it wasn't worth adjusting this
test to pass with non-standard work_mem values.
"make installcheck" also fails with lower random_page_cost settings.
There doesn't seem to be any reason to permit a non-standard setting
to cause installcheck to fail elsewhere, while not tolerating the same
issue here, with work_mem.
Thanks
--
Peter Geoghegan