Re: export FUNC_MAX_ARGS as a read-only GUC variable - Mailing list pgsql-patches

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: export FUNC_MAX_ARGS as a read-only GUC variable
Date
Msg-id 200312012148.hB1LmWr09637@candle.pha.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: export FUNC_MAX_ARGS as a read-only GUC variable  (Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>)
Responses Re: export FUNC_MAX_ARGS as a read-only GUC variable  (Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>)
List pgsql-patches
Joe Conway wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Joe Conway wrote:
> >>The description is a statement because the option is boolean, i.e. the
> >>statement "Datetimes are integer based" is either "true" or "false"
> >>("on" or "off", etc). How stongly do you feel about it? I don't think
> >>"integer_datetime_storage" is accurate in any case.
> >
> > Not strongly.  Keep it unchanged.
> >
>
> Any more thoughts on block_size (or page_size)?

When I think of block size I think of disk blocks, and when I think of
pages I think of memory pages.  Unfortunately, neither is a database
page.

I guess my point is that we have heap pages and index pages, but no one
calls them heap blocks or index blocks, and I am not sure I would know
what they meant if they said that.

--
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

pgsql-patches by date:

Previous
From: Joe Conway
Date:
Subject: Re: export FUNC_MAX_ARGS as a read-only GUC variable
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: Minor lmgr code cleanup