For the record, that form of statement ("no, you don't need X") cuts both ways, and therefore whether or not I agree that PostgreSQL needs query hints, this argument of comparison bothers me: you could use the same argument for "No, you don't need the ability to violate referential integrity! Your system is broken if it violates declared foreign key constraints!", which is to me a very correct (and "very PostgreSQL") statement to make about how horrible it is that MySQL /added a feature/ that turns off foreign key constraint checks in a way that leaves your data in an incosistent state due to the same kind of pressure from DBAs who weren't really thinking about the long term consequences. Put differently: you stripped away all of the reasoning and are now comparing the lexical syntax of a conclusion and trying to claim that this means two situations are alike, which is actively misleading to your readers and yourself.