Re: FUNC_MAX_ARGS benchmarks - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: FUNC_MAX_ARGS benchmarks
Date
Msg-id 3839.1028564737@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: FUNC_MAX_ARGS benchmarks  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
Responses Re: FUNC_MAX_ARGS benchmarks  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> I don't have trouble with 128, but other than standards compliance,  I
> can't see many people getting >64 names.

One nice thing about 128 is you can basically forget about the weird
truncation behavior on generated sequence names for serial columns
--- "tablename_colname_seq" will be correct for essentially all
practical cases.  At 64 you might still need to think about it.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: FUNC_MAX_ARGS benchmarks
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: FUNC_MAX_ARGS benchmarks