Re: [PATCHES] [SQL] 16 parameter limit - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Alvaro Herrera
Subject Re: [PATCHES] [SQL] 16 parameter limit
Date
Msg-id 20020415233404.57d7fc01.alvherre@atentus.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [PATCHES] [SQL] 16 parameter limit  ("Rod Taylor" <rbt@zort.ca>)
Responses Re: [PATCHES] [SQL] 16 parameter limit  (Neil Conway <nconway@klamath.dyndns.org>)
Re: [PATCHES] [SQL] 16 parameter limit  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
En Mon, 15 Apr 2002 23:19:45 -0400
"Rod Taylor" <rbt@zort.ca> escribió:

> On the note of NAMEDATALEN, a view in the INFORMATION_SCHEMA
> definition is exactly 2 characters over the current limit.
> 
> ADMINISTRABLE_ROLE_AUTHORIZATIONS
> 
> Not that it's a great reason, but it isn't a bad one for increasing
> the limit ;)

http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-general/2002-01/msg00939.php

(Tom Lane says both SQL92 and SQL99 specify 128 as the maximun
identifier length)

Anyway, how does one measure the perfomance impact of such a change?
By merely changing the constant definition, or also by actually using
long identifiers? I can do that if it's of any help, for various values
perhaps.

-- 
Alvaro Herrera (<alvherre[a]atentus.com>)
"Las cosas son buenas o malas segun las hace nuestra opinion" (Lisias)


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Rod Taylor"
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] YADP - Yet another Dependency Patch
Next
From: Neil Conway
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] [SQL] 16 parameter limit