Re: INDEX_MAX_KEYS - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: INDEX_MAX_KEYS
Date
Msg-id 200203112134.g2BLYss16831@candle.pha.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: INDEX_MAX_KEYS  (Jan Wieck <janwieck@yahoo.com>)
Responses Re: INDEX_MAX_KEYS  (Jan Wieck <janwieck@yahoo.com>)
Re: INDEX_MAX_KEYS  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Jan Wieck wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Greg Copeland wrote:
> >
> > Checking application/pgp-signature: FAILURE
> > -- Start of PGP signed section.
> > > I'm looking through the index code and just happened to notice that
> > > INDEX_MAX_KEYS is currently set to 16.  It there a reason for this value
> > > to be at 16 or was it arbitrarily specified?
> >
> > Arbitrary, and there is discussion about increasing it.
> 
>     Wasn't it that this number had to be <= the maximum number of
>     function args?

Yes, they are related.  At least I think so.  Anyway, the parameter that
needs increasing is max function args.  I got mixed up there.

--  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610)
853-3000+  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill,
Pennsylvania19026
 


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Jan Wieck
Date:
Subject: Re: numeric/decimal docs bug?
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: numeric/decimal docs bug?