Re: Document parameter count limit - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: Document parameter count limit
Date
Msg-id ZUEAaVFHTGGdveM5@momjian.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Document parameter count limit  (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 11:04:47PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 04:17:19PM -0700, David G. Johnston wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 4:13 PM David G. Johnston <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > 
> >     On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 4:08 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> > 
> >         Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
> >         > Ah, I was confused.  I documented both in the attached patch.
> > 
> >         The function one should have the same annotation as some others:
> > 
> >              <entry>can be increased by recompiling <productname>PostgreSQL</
> >         productname></entry>
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >     I'd like to see a comment on the parameter count one too.
> > 
> >     "Alternatives include using a temporary table or passing them in as a
> >     single array parameter."
> > 
> >     About the only time this is likely to come up is with many parameters of
> >     the same type and meaning, pointing that out with the array option seems
> >     excessively wordy for the comment area.
> > 
> >     Needs a comma: 65,535
> > 
> >     Kinda think both should be tacked on to the end of the table.  I'd also put
> >     function arguments first so it appears under the compile time partition
> >     keys limit.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Cleanups for consistency:
> > 
> > Move "identifier length" after "partition keys" (before the new "function
> > arguments")
> > 
> > Add commas to: 1,600 and 1,664 and 8,192
> 
> Okay, I made all the suggested changes in ordering and adding commas,
> plus the text about the ability to change function arguments via
> recompiling.
> 
> I didn't put commas in 8192 since that is a power-of-two and kind of a
> magic number used in many places.
> 
> I am not sure where to put text about using arrays to handle many
> function arguments.  I just don't see it fitting in the table, or the
> paragraph below the table.

Patch applied back to Postgres 12.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        https://momjian.us
  EDB                                      https://enterprisedb.com

  Only you can decide what is important to you.



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: The documentation for storage type 'plain' actually allows single byte header
Next
From: "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)"
Date:
Subject: RE: A recent message added to pg_upgade