Re: Change default of jit to off

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Tomas Vondra <tomas(at)vondra(dot)me>
Cc: Jelte Fennema-Nio <postgres(at)jeltef(dot)nl>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Greg Sabino Mullane <htamfids(at)gmail(dot)com>, Adrien Nayrat <adrien(dot)nayrat(at)anayrat(dot)info>, Christoph Berg <myon(at)debian(dot)org>, Euler Taveira <euler(at)eulerto(dot)com>, Pierre Ducroquet <p(dot)psql(at)pinaraf(dot)info>, Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)kurilemu(dot)de>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Andreas Karlsson <andreas(at)proxel(dot)se>, Anthonin Bonnefoy <anthonin(dot)bonnefoy(at)datadoghq(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Michael Banck <mbanck(at)gmx(dot)net>
Subject: Re: Change default of jit to off
Date: 2026-03-20 16:24:27
Message-ID: 1629115.1774023867@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tomas Vondra <tomas(at)vondra(dot)me> writes:
> ISTM there's a clear consensus to get this committed for PG19, so
> barring objections I'll take care of that in the next couple days.
> Unless someone else wants to ...

+1

> Another option would be to leave that for mid-beta, which is where we
> tweaked the io_method GUCs last year. But we did that to get some
> testing for 'worker' (in case we revert to 'sync'), and we don't need
> that for jit.

Doesn't seem like something to change mid-beta. If it makes anyone
unhappy, we'd best find out sooner not later.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2026-03-20 16:27:49 Re: Fixes inconsistent behavior in vacuum when it processes multiple relations
Previous Message Tom Lane 2026-03-20 16:22:25 Re: TupleDescAttr bounds checks