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

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: [PATCHES] [SQL] 16 parameter limit
Date
Msg-id 200204160344.g3G3iGg04889@candle.pha.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [PATCHES] [SQL] 16 parameter limit  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@atentus.com>)
Responses Re: [PATCHES] [SQL] 16 parameter limit  ("Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au>)
List pgsql-hackers
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> (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.

I think I would measure disk size change in a newly created database,
and run regression for various values.  That uses a lot of identifier
lookups.

--  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: Neil Conway
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] [SQL] 16 parameter limit
Next
From: "Christopher Kings-Lynne"
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] [SQL] 16 parameter limit