Re: INDEX_MAX_KEYS - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Jan Wieck
Subject Re: INDEX_MAX_KEYS
Date
Msg-id 200203112150.g2BLo9N28603@saturn.janwieck.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: INDEX_MAX_KEYS  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
Responses Re: INDEX_MAX_KEYS
List pgsql-hackers
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> 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.
   Then  again,  if  they are related, why not let the index max   keys be automatically set according to the function
max arg   configuration?   Is  there any reason someone want's to limit   it smaller than the system could technically
handle?


Jan

--

#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me.                                  #
#================================================== JanWieck@Yahoo.com #



_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com



pgsql-hackers by date:

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