Magnus Hagander wrote:
> 2009/10/13 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>:
>> Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com> writes:
>>> Magnus Hagander wrote:
>>>> Actually, I found a note that said it's recommended to never increase
>>>> it about 65535 - so perhaps we should put our limit at that instead od
>>>> 32767?
>>> Yeah, setting it at 65535 seems like a good idea then. I'm tempted to
>>> backport this, although it's not strictly speaking a bug fix. Any
>>> objections?
>> Why isn't it a bug fix? +1 for backport ...
>
> Yeah, +1 there.
Ok, committed.
--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
