Re: FUNC_MAX_ARGS benchmarks - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: FUNC_MAX_ARGS benchmarks
Date
Msg-id 200208040254.g742sC124330@candle.pha.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: FUNC_MAX_ARGS benchmarks  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> > OK, time to get moving folks.  Looks like the increase in the function
> > args to 32 and the NAMEDATALEN to 128 has been sufficiently tested.
> 
> I'm convinced by Joe's numbers that FUNC_MAX_ARGS = 32 shouldn't hurt
> too much.  But have we done equivalent checks on NAMEDATALEN?  In
> particular, do we know what it does to the size of template1?

No, I thought we saw the number, was 30%?   No, we did a test for 64.
Can someone get us that number for 128?

--  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: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: PITR, checkpoint, and local relations
Next
From: Gavin Sherry
Date:
Subject: Re: CLUSTER and indisclustered