On Thu, Nov 10, 2022 at 11:01:18AM -0700, David G. Johnston wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 10, 2022 at 10:58 AM Corey Huinker <corey.huinker@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> + <entry>if you are reading this prepatorily, please redesign your
> query to use temporary tables or arrays</entry>
>
>
> I agree with the documentation of this parameter.
> I agree with dissuading anyone from attempting to change it
> The wording is bordering on snark (however well deserved) and I think the
> voice is slightly off.
>
> Alternate suggestion:
>
>
> Queries approaching this limit usually can be refactored to use arrays
> or temporary tables, thus reducing parameter overhead.
>
>
> The bit about parameter overhead appeals to the reader's desire for
> performance, rather than just focusing on "you shouldn't want this".
>
>
> Yeah, the wording is a bit tongue-in-cheek. Figured assuming a committer wants
> this at all we'd come up with better wording. I like your suggestion.
Does this come up enough to document it? I assume the error message the
user receives is clear.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> https://momjian.us
EDB https://enterprisedb.com
Indecision is a decision. Inaction is an action. Mark Batterson
